Skip to main content

Full text of "North Carolina courts : annual report of the Administrative Office of the Courts"

See other formats


X/3 , 



N.C. DOCUMENTS 
CLEARINGHOUSE 



MJS 17 1989 



^orttj (Earolma (Etmrt& 



STATE LIBRARY 
RALEIGH 



1987-88 




JWmml Report 

of tlje 

JVomtmstntttOe (Bfiicz of tlje Courts 



The Cover: The Lincoln County Courthouse in Lincolnton, North Carolina was 
completed in 1923. The rectangular structure is of finely dressed stone with three-story, 
flat-roofed wings flanking a taller central block with a gabled roof. Matching pedi- 
mented Doric porticoes on the front and rear of the center section, a Doric frieze along 
the sides, and antefixes decorating the corners and roof ridge give the building its 
distinctive Greek character. Lincolnton was established as the county seat of Lincoln 
County in 1785. 



NORTH CAROLINA COURTS 



1987-88 




ANNUAL REPORT 



of the 



ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICE OF THE COURTS 




ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICE OF THE COURTS 

JUSTICE BUILDING 
RALEIGH, NORTH CAROLINA 



The Honorable James G. Exum, Jr., Chief Justice 
The Supreme Court of North Carolina 
Raleigh, North Carolina 

Dear Mr. Chief Justice: 

In accord with Section 7A-343 of the North Carolina General Statutes, I herewith transmit the 
Twenty-second Annual Report of the Administrative Office of the Courts, relating to the fiscal year, July I , 
1987 — June 30, 1988. 

Fiscal year 1987-88 marks the fourth consecutive year with significant increases in filings and disposi- 
tions in both the Superior and District Courts. During 1987-88, as compared to 1986-87, total case filings 
increased by 6.9% in Superior Court and by 8.1% in District Court; dispositions increased by 4.7% in 
Superior Court and by 9.0% in District Court. Because total filings were greater than total dispositions, 
more cases were pending at the end of the fiscal year than were pending at the beginning. 

Appreciation is expressed to the many persons who participated in the data reporting, compilation, and 
writing required to produce this annual report. Within the Administrative Office of the Courts, principal 
responsibilities were shared by the Research and Planning Division and the Information Services Division. 
The principal burden of reporting the great mass of trial court data rested upon the offices of the clerks of 
superior court located in each of the one hundred counties of the State. The Clerk of the Supreme Court 
and the Clerk of the Court of Appeals provided the case data relating to our appellate courts. 

Without the responsible work of many persons across the State this report would not have been possible. 

Respectfully submitted, 




Franklin Freeman, Jr. 
Director 



»f 



May 1989 



TABLE OF CONTENTS 



Parti 
The 1987-88 Judicial Year in Review 

The 1987-88 Judicial Year in Review 1 

Part II 

Court System Organization and Operations in 1987-88 

Historical Development of the North Carolina Court System 7 

The Present Court System 10 

Organization and Operations 

The Supreme Court 14 

The Court of Appeals . 25 

The Superior Courts 30 

The District Courts 33 

District Attorneys 38 

Clerks of Superior Court 42 

Juvenile Services Division 45 

Office of Guardian Ad Litem Services 47 

Public Defenders 49 

Appellate Defender 51 

The N.C. Courts Commission 52 

The Judicial Standards Commission 54 

Part III 
Court Resources in 1987-88 

Judicial Department Finances 

Appropriations 59 

Expenditures 62 

Receipts 64 

Distribution of Receipts 65 

Cost and Case Data on Representation of Indigents 68 

Judicial Department Personnel 75 

Part IV 

Trial Courts Caseflow Data in 1987-88 

Trial Courts Case Data 79 

Superior Court Division Caseflow Data 83 

District Court Division Caseflow Data 143 



Tables, Charts and Graphs 

Part II 
Court System Organization and Operations in 1987-88 

Original Jurisdictions and Routes of Appeal in the 

Present Court System 10 

Principal Administrative Authorities for North Carolina 

Trial Courts 13 

The Supreme Court of North Carolina 14 

Supreme Court, Caseload Inventory 16 

Supreme Court, Appeals Filed 17 

Supreme Court, Petitions Filed 17 

Supreme Court, Caseload Types 18 

Supreme Court, Submission of Cases to Decision Stage 19 

Supreme Court, Disposition of Petitions and Other Proceedings 19 

Supreme Court, Disposition of Appeals 20 

Supreme Court, Manner of Disposition of Appeals 21 

Supreme Court, Type of Disposition of Petitions 21 

Supreme Court, Appeals Docketed and Disposed of, 

1982-83—1987-88 22 

Supreme Court, Petitions Docketed and Allowed, 

1982-83—1987-88 23 

Supreme Court, Processing Time for Disposed Cases 24 

The Court of Appeals of North Carolina 25 

Court of Appeals, Filings and Dispositions 27 

Court of Appeals, Manner of Case Dispositions 27 

Court of Appeals, Filings and Dispositions, 1982-83—1987-88 28 

Map of Judicial Divisions and Districts 29 

Judges of Superior Court 30 

District Court Judges 33 

District Attorneys 38 

Clerks of Superior Court 42 

Chief Court Counselors 46 

Guardian Ad Litem Division Coordinators 48 

Public Defenders 49 

Appejlate Defenders 51 

The N.C. Courts Commission 52 

The Judicial Standards Commission 54 

Part III 
Court Resources in 1987-88 

General Fund Appropriations, All State Agencies 

and Judicial Department 59 

General Fund Appropriations, All State Agencies 

and Judicial Department 60 

General Fund Appropriations for Operating Expenses of All 

State Agencies and Judicial Department 61 

General Fund Expenditures for Judicial Department Operations 62 

Judicial Department Receipts 64 

Distribution of Judicial Department Receipts 65 



Tables, Charts and Graphs 

Amounts of Fees, Fines, and Forfeitures Collected by the 

Courts and Distributed to Counties and Municipalities 66 

Cost and Case Data on Representation of Indigents 69 

Mental Hospital Commitment Hearings 70 

Assigned Counsel, Cases and Expenditures 71 

Judicial Department Personnel 75 



Superior Courts 
Superior Courts 
Superior Courts 
Superior Courts 
Superior Courts 
Superior Courts 
Superior Courts 
Superior Courts 
Superior Courts 
Superior Courts 
Superior Courts 
Superior Courts 
Superior Courts 
Superior Courts 
Superior Courts 
Superior Courts 
Superior Courts 
Superior Courts 
Superior Courts 
Superior Courts 
Superior Courts 
District Courts, 
District Courts, 
District Courts, 
District Courts, 
District Courts, 
District Courts, 
District Courts, 
District Courts, 
District Courts, 
District Courts, 
District Courts, 
District Courts, 
District Courts, 
District Courts, 
District Courts, 
District Courts, 
District Courts, 
District Courts, 



Part IV 

Trial Courts Caseflow Data in 1987-88 

Caseload Trends 84 

Caseload 85 

Median Ages of Cases 86 

Civil Cases Trends 87 

Civil Case Filings By Case-Type 88 

Civil Cases Inventory 89 

Civil Cases, Manner of Disposition 93 

Civil Cases, Manner of Disposition, By County 94 

Ages of Civil Cases Pending 98 

Ages of Civil Cases Disposed 102 

Trends in Estates and Special Proceedings 106 

Filings and Dispositions For Estates and Special Proceedings 107 

Trends in Criminal Cases Ill 

Criminal Case Filings By Case-Type 112 

Inventory of Criminal Cases 113 

Manner of Disposition of Felonies 117 

Manner of Disposition of Felonies, By County 118 

Manner of Disposition of Misdemeanors 122 

Manner of Disposition of Misdemeanors, By County 123 

Ages of Criminal Cases Pending 1 27 

Ages of Criminal Cases Disposed 1 34 

Filings and Dispositions 145 

Filing and Disposition Trends of All Cases 146 

Filing and Disposition Trends of Civil Cases 147 

Civil Non-Magistrate Cases 148 

Civil Non-Magistrate Filings By Case-Type 149 

Civil Caseload Inventory 1 50 

Manner of Disposition of Civil Cases 1 54 

Manner of Disposition of Civil Cases, By County 155 

Ages of Domestic Relations Cases Pending 162 

Ages of Domestic Relations Cases Disposed 166 

Ages of General Civil and Magistrate Appeal/ Transfer Cases Pending 170 

Ages of General Civil and Magistrate Appeal/ Transfer Cases Disposed 174 

Civil Magistrate Filings and Dispositions 178 

Matters Alleged in Juvenile Petitions 180 

Adjudicatory Hearings For Juvenile Matters 184 

Trends of Criminal Cases 189 

Motor Vehicle Criminal Case Filings and Dispositions 190 

Non-Motor Vehicle Criminal Cases, Caseload Inventory 194 



in 



Tables, Charts and Graphs 

District Courts, Non-Motor Vehicle Criminal Cases, Manner of Disposition 198 

District Courts, Non-Motor Vehicle Criminal Cases, Manner of Disposition, By County 199 

District Courts, Ages of Non-Motor Vehicle Criminal Cases Pending 203 

District Courts, Ages of Non-Motor Vehicle Criminal Cases Disposed 207 

District Courts, Infraction Case Filings and Dispositions 211 



IV 



PARTI 



THE 1987-1988 JUDICIAL YEAR IN REVIEW 



THE 1987-88 JUDICIAL YEAR IN REVIEW 



This Annual Report on the work of North Carolina's 
Judicial Department is for the fiscal year which began 
July 1, 1987 and ended June 30, 1988. 

The Workload of the Courts 

Case filings in the Supreme Court totaled 145 com- 
pared with 196 filed during 1986-87. A total of 635 peti- 
tions were filed in the Supreme Court, compared with 674 
in 1986-87; and 67 petitions were allowed, compared with 
99 in 1986-87. 

For the Court of Appeals for 1 987-88, case filings were 
1,351 compared with 1,288 for the 1986-87 year. Petitions 
filed in 1987-88 totaled 446, compared with 458 during the 
1986-87 year. 

More detailed data on the appellate courts is included 
in Part II of this Annual Report. 

In the superior courts, case filings (civil and criminal) 
increased by 6.9% to a total of 105,704 in 1987-88, com- 
pared with 99,886 cases in 1986-87. Superior court case 
dispositions also increased, to a total of 100,808, com- 
pared with 96,308 in 1986-87. As, case filings during the 
year exceeded case dispositions, the total number of cases 
pending at the end of the year increased by 4,896. 

Not including juvenile proceedings and mental hospital 
commitment hearings, the statewide total of district court 
filings (civil and criminal) during 1987-88 was 2,004,447, 
an increase of 135,462 (7.2%) from 1986-87 filings of 
1,868,985 cases. During 1987-88, a total of 608,845 infrac- 
tion cases were filed along with a total of 419,407 criminal 
motor vehicle cases, for a combined total of 1,028,252 
cases. This combined total is an increase of 52,764 cases 
(5.4%) above the 975,488 cases filed during 1986-87. Dur- 
ing 1987-88, filings of criminal non-motor vehicle cases in 
the district courts increased by 46,579 (9.9%) to 514,710, 
compared with 468,131 during 1986-87. Filings of civil 
magistrate cases in the district courts increased by 29,881 
(12.1%), to 277,336during 1987-88 compared with 247,455 
during 1986-87. 

Operations of the superior and district courts are sum- 
marized in Part II of this Report, and detailed informa- 
tion on the caseloads in the 100 counties and 34 judicial 
districts is presented in Part IV. 

1988 Legislative Highlights 
Judicial, Prosecutorial, and Public Defender Districts 

Chapters 1037 and 1056 of the 1987 Session Laws (1988 
Session) make numerous conforming amendments to the 
General Statutes, in light of the 1987 legislation on super- 
ior court redistricting. 

As a result of superior court redistricting, geographic 
"districts" for the various components of the Judicial 
Department are no longer necessarily coterminous. Ref- 
erences in the General Statutes to a "judicial district" are 
replaced by references to the "superior court district," 
"district court district," "prosecutorial district," and/ or 
"public defender district" to which the particular statute 
applies. 



Chapter 1056 divides present Judicial Districts 12 and 
1 6 into new Districts 1 2, 1 6 A, and 1 6B for the prosecutor- 
ial, district court, and public defender districts. As a 
result, these districts are coterminous with the corres- 
ponding whole-country districts (or "sets of districts") 
established in 1987 for the superior court division. The 
legislation allocates existing personnel among these three 
new districts; creates an additional district court judge- 
ship effective July 1, 1989, allocated to district court 
District 16 A; and effective January 1, 1989, establishes a 
district attorney's office for a new prosecutorial District 
16A and establishes two new public defender offices, for 
public defender Districts 16A and 16B. In addition, effec- 
tive January 1, 1989, the public defender office presently 
serving Pitt and Carteret Counties in Judicial District 3 is 
divided into two offices, for public defender districts 3A 
(Pitt) and 3B (Carteret). 

Chapter 1037 clarifies certain provisions of the 1987 
redistricting legislation. New section G.S. 7A-41.1 (Chap- 
ter 1037, Section 2) specifies that there shall be one and 
only one senior resident superior court judge for each 
superior court "district" or "set of [superior court] dis- 
tricts." A "set of districts" is defined to mean, in essence, a 
group of districts that individually do not comprise an 
entire county, but collectively are necessary to comprise 
the entire county. A superior court "district" is a district 
that does comprise one or more entire counties. Amend- 
ments to G.S. 7A-47.3 (in Chapter 1037, Section 9) spec- 
ify that all sessions of superior court are for the entire 
county, regardless of how many superior court districts 
there may be for the county; and that superior court 
judges may be assigned under the rotation system to hold 
the courts of either one "district" or one "set of districts." 

Sessions of Superior Court Outside County Seat 

Chapter 1037, Section 2.1, amending G.S. 7A-42 effec- 
tive January 1, 1989, authorizes the senior resident super- 
ior court judge of a county to order sessions of superior 
court at any location outside the county seat when exigent 
circumstances exist. The additional sessions must be 
approved by the Chief Justice, and an order may issue 
only after approval of the location and facilities by the 
Administrative Office of the Courts, and after consulta- 
tion with the Clerk and county officials. (Present provi- 
sions of G.S. 7A-42, relating to sessions of Superior Court 
outside the county seat in cities with a population of 
35,000 or more, remain unchanged.) 

Additional Seat of District Court 

Effective July 1, 1989, Chapter 1075 authorizes an 
additional seat of district court for district court District 
3, in Havelock (Craven County). 

Juvenile Code/Guardian ad Litem Revisions 

Chapter 1090 amends several sections of the Juvenile 
Coide, with the overall aim of imposing stricter standards 
on removal of juveniles from the home and improving 



THE 1987-88 JUDICIAL YEAR IN REVIEW 



protection of juveniles' rights. Effective June 1, 1989, the 
services of the Guardian ad Litem Office within AOC are 
extended to include appointment of a guardian ad litem, 
in the discretion of the judge, in dependency cases. Effec- 
tive immediately, the clerk's duties with regard to the 
summons in juvenile cases are amended to specify that the 
summons shall issue immediately after a petition is filed, 
and tht the summons is to be delivered to any person 
authorized to serve process (rather than to a law enforce- 
ment officer in all cases). Also effective immediately, 
specific findings are required before dispositional or other 
orders may remove a juvenile from the home. 



establish a schedule for paying the fees of attorneys 
representing indigents on a per case basis, and report to 
the 1989 Session of the General Assembly. 

Death Penalty Resource Center 

For fiscal 1988-89, the Death Penalty Resource Center 
will be funded by AOC from the Indigent Persons' Attor- 
ney Fee Fund, to a maximum of $191,505 (Chapter 1086, 
Section 109). The Center is a four-position section of the 
Appellate Defender's Office, previously funded from pri- 
vate sources. 



DWI, Commercial Vehicles 

Chapter 1112 creates a new misdemeanor offense, driv- 
ing while impaired in a commercial vehicle. A blood 
alcohol content of 0.04 or more is sufficient to constitute 
this offense (compared to a blook alcohol content of 0.10 
or more driving while impired in other than a commercial 
vehicle). The statutes for automatic, immediate ten-day 
civil license revocation are also amended, to extend to 
driving in a commercial vehicle with a blood alcohol 
content of 0.04 or more. (Chapter 1 1 12 is effective June 1, 
1989, and will expire June 30, 1989, in the absence of 
action by the 1989 Session of the General Assembly.) 

Investigative Grand Juries 

Chapter 1 040 extends the authorization for investigative 
grand juries in drug trafficking cases to July 1 , 1 99 1 . The 
authorization for these special grand juries would other- 
wise have expired October 1, 1988. In addition, an amend- 
ment to G.S. 15A-622(h), effective October 1, 1988, 
requires the concurrence of a committee of at least three 
members of the Conference oif District Attorneys (in 
addition to concurrence of the Attorneys General), before 
a district attorney may request the convening of an inves- 
tigative grand jury. 

Indigent Persons' Attorney Fee Fund 

For fiscal 1988-89, the General Assembly directed 
AOC to allot portions of the funds in the Indigent Per- 
sons' Attorney Fee Fund (approximately $13 million) to 
each county, or to each district where superior and district 
court districts are coterminous (Chapter 1086, Section 
1 13, effective July 1, 1988). The allotment for each county 
or district is to be in proportion to the numbers of indi- 
gent persons in each county or district who were not 
represented by a public defender during 1987-88. 

Determination of an Indigent's Attorney's Fee 

Chapter 1086, Section 113, amends G.S. 7A-458 to 
specify that the fee of an attorney who represents an 
indigent person is to be fixed by the judge who heard the 
case, and deletes "the fee usually charged in similar cases" 
from the factors the judge should consider when deter- 
mining the fee. The General Assembly requested AOC to 



Salaries, Longevity Pay, and Other Items 

Funds were appropriated by the 1988 Session for a 
4.5% pay raise for all officials and employees of the Judi- 
cial Department. 

The travel allowance for superior court judges under 
G.S. 7A-44(a) was increased, effective January 1, 1989, 
from $6,500 to $7,000 annually (Chapter 1086, Section 
30). 

Effective July 1, 1988, the pay for emergency justices 
and judges is increased from $100 to $150 per day (Chap- 
ter 1086, Section 31). 

Longevity pay was authorized for the Director of AOC 
at the rate of longevity pay for superior court judges, and 
longevity pay was authorized for the Assistant Director of 
AOC at the rate of longevity pay for district court judges 
(Chapter 1100, Section 15). 

Longevity pay and salaries were increased for some 
clerks of superior court (Chapter 1 100, Sections 16 and 
17). The definition of "service" that is used to calculate a 
clerk's longevity pay was expanded to include "service" as 
an assistant clerk or as a superivsor of clerks within the 
AOC. In addition, the salaries of some clerks were raised 
by amending the population categories set forth in G.S. 
7A-101(a), upon which clerks' salaries are based. As a 
result, clerks in counties with population of 30,000 to 
49,999 will be paid at a higher pay-category. 

No funding for merit increases was provided. However, 
Chapter 1086, Section 27, creates a 16-member Legisla- 
tive Study Commission on a System of Merit Pay for 
State Employees. The Commission is directed to report to 
the 1989 Session of the General Assembly. 

Employee Benefits 

Retirement Benefits: Chapter 1 1 10 increases the retire- 
ment benefits of state employees, by raising the accrual 
rate (in G.S. 128-27) for calculating retirement benefits 
from 1.58% to 1.60%; and allows accumulated sick leave 
to be included in the amount of "creditable service" 
earned for retirement or early retirement. Chapter 1 103, 
amending G.S. 135-4, allows state employees to purchase 
service credit toward retirement for extended perids of 
leave without pay due to illness or injury. 

Death Benefits: Chapter 1 108 increases the death 
benefits payable for state employees. Death benefits 
remain based on one year's salary, but the General 



THE 1987-88 JUDICIAL YEAR IN REVIEW 



Assembly established a minimum benefit of $25,000 
regardless of salary, and raised the maximum benefit 
from $20,000 to $50,000. In addition, death benefits are 
now payable regardless of an employee's age; previously, 
the benefit was payable only if an employee died prior to 
age 70. 



New Positions 

The 1987 Session of the General Assembly approp- 
riated funds for the following new positions effective 
during fiscal 1988-89: eleven new district court judge- 
ships, one each for Districts 3, 5, 7 10, 11, 16, 18, 19B, 21, 
25, and 26, to be filled in the 1988 general election; one 
superior court judgeship for new District 16B, to be filled 
in the 1988 general election; five new assistant district 
attorneys, one each for districts 3A, 17A, 19A, 19B, and 
21; three secretaries and ten victim-witness assistant posi- 
tions for district attorney offices; five new magistrate 
positions to be allocated in accordance with G.S. 7A- 
171(c); 14 positions in the juvenile court counselor pro- 
gram; ten secretarial positions for the ten new senior 
resident superior court judgeships created effective Janu- 



ary 1, 1989; one court reporter; one deputy clerk; and two 
secretaries in public defender offices. 

The 1988 Session of the General Assembly approp- 
riated or authorized the use of funds for the following 
additional positions: a second regular superior court 
judgeship for District 1 6B, to be appointed by the Gover- 
nor; two new fully staffed public defender offices for new 
public defender districts 16A and 16B; a new district 
attorney's office effective January 1, 1989, for Prosecutor- 
ial District 16A, with the district attorney position to be 
filled in the 1988 general election; an additional district 
courtjudgeship for District 16A, effective July 1, 1989, to 
be filled pursuant to G.S. 7A-142; ten new deputy clerk 
positions, funded from existing funds, rather than any 
new appropriation; and four existing positions within the 
Appellate Defender's Office, previously funded by private 
sources, to be funded from the Indigent Persons' Attor- 
ney Fee Fund in 1988-89. 

Total Appropriations 

The 1988 Session of the General Assembly approp- 



riated a total of $177,774,981 
for the 1988-89 fiscal year. 



to the Judicial Department 



PART II 



COURT SYSTEM ORGANIZATION 
AND OPERATIONS 

• Historical Development of Court System 

• Present Court System 

• Organization and Operations in 1987-88 



mA 



HISTORICAL DEVELOPMENT OF THE NORTH CAROLINA COURT SYSTEM 



From its early colonial period North Carolina's judicial 
system has been the focus of periodic attention and adjust- 
ment. Through the years, there has been a repeated 
sequence of critical examination, proposals for reform, and 
finally the enactment of some reform measures. 

Colonial Period 

Around 1700 the royal governor established a General 
(or Supreme) Court for the colony and a dispute developed 
over the appointment of associate justices. The Assembly 
conceded to the King the right to name the chief justice but 
unsuccessfully tried to win for itself the power to appoint 
the associate justices. Other controversies developed con- 
cerning the creation and jurisdiction of the courts and the 
tenure of judges. As for the latter, the Assembly's position 
was that judge appointments should be for good behavior 
as against the royal governor's decision for life appoint- 
ment. State historians have noted that "the Assembly won 
its fight to establish courts and the judicial structure in the 
province was grounded on laws enacted by the legislature," 
which was more familiar with local conditions and needs 
(Lefler and Newsome, 142). Nevertheless, North Carolina 
alternated between periods under legislatively enacted 
reforms (like good behavior tenure and the Court Bill of 
1746, which contained the seeds of the post-Revolutionary 
court system) and periods of stalemate and anarchy after 
such enactments were nullified by royal authority. A more 
elaborate system was framed by legislation in 1767 to last 
five years. It was not renewed because of persisting dis- 
agreement between local and royal partisans. As a result, 
North Carolina was without higher courts until after Inde- 
pendence (Battle, 847). 

At the lower court level during the colonial period, judi- 
cial and county government administrative functions were 
combined in the authority of the justices of the peace, who 
were appointed by the royal governor. 

After the Revolution 

When North Carolina became a state in 1 776, the colon- 
ial structure of the court system was retained largely intact. 
The Courts of Pleas and Quarter Sessions — the county 
court which continued in use from about 1670 to 1868 
— were still held by the assembled justices of the peace in 
each county. The justices were appointed by the governor 
on the recommendation of the General Assembly, and they 
were paid out of fees charged litigants. On the lowest level 
of the judicial system, magistrate courts of limited jurisdic- 
tion were held by justices of the peace, singly or in pairs, 
while the county court was out of term. 

The new Constitution of 1776 empowered the General 
Assembly to appoint judges of the Supreme Court of Law 
and Equity. A court law enacted a year later authorized 
three superior court judges and created judicial districts. 
Sessions were supposed to be held in the court towns of 
each district twice a year, under a system much like the one 
that had expired in 1772. Just as there had been little 
distinction in terminology between General Court and 



Supreme Court prior to the Revolution, the terms Supreme 
Court and Superior Court were also interchangeable dur- 
ing the period immediately following the Revolution. 

One of the most vexing governmental problems con- 
fronting the new State of North Carolina was its judiciary. 
"From its inception in 1777 the state's judiciary caused 
complaint and demands for reform. "(Lefler and Newsome, 
291, 292). Infrequency of sessions, conflicting judge opin- 
ions, and insufficient number of judges, and lack of means 
for appeal were all cited as problems, although the greatest 
weakness was considered to be the lack of a real Supreme 
Court. 

In 1779, the legislature required the Superior Court 
judges to meet together in Raleigh as a Court of Conference 
to resolve cases which were disagreed on in the districts. 
This court was continued and made permanent by subse- 
quent laws. The justices were required to put their opinions 
in writing to be delivered orally in court. The Court of 
Conference was changed in name to the Supreme Court in 
1 805 and authorized to hear appeals in 1810. Because of the 
influence of the English legal system, however, there was 
still no conception of an alternative to judges sitting 
together to hear appeals from cases which they had them- 
selves heard in the districts in panels of as few as two judges 
(Battle, 848). In 1818, though, an independent three-judge 
Supreme Court was created for review of cases decided at 
the Superior Court level. 

Meanwhile, semi-annual superior court sessions in each 
county were made mandatory in 1806, and the State was 
divided into six circuits, or ridings, where the six judges 
were to sit in rotation, two judges constituting a quorum as 
before. 

The County Court of justices of the peace continued 
during this period as the lowest court and as the agency of 
local government. 

After the Civil War 

Major changes to modernize the judiciary and make it 
more democratic were made in 1868. A primary holdover 
from the English legal arrangement - the distinction 
between law and equity proceedings — was abolished. The 
County Court's control of local government was abolished. 
Capital offenses were limited to murder, arson, burglary 
and rape, and the Constitution stated that the aim of 
punishment was "not only to satisfy justice, but also to 
reform the offender, and thus prevent crime". The member- 
ship of the Supreme Court was raised to five, and the 
selection of the justices (including the designation of the 
chief justice) and superior court judges (raised in number to 
12) was taken from the legislature and given to the voters, 
although vacancies were to be filled by the governor until 
the next election. The Court of Pleas and Quarter Sessions 
— The County Court of which three justices of the peace 
constituted a quorum was eliminated. Its judicial 

responsibilities were divided between the Superior Courts 
and the individual justices of the peace, who were retained 
as separate judicial officers with limited jurisdiction. 



HISTORICAL DEVELOPMENT OF THE NORTH CAROLINA COURT SYSTEM 



Conservatively oriented amendments to the 1868 
Constitution in 1875 reduced the number of Supreme 
Court justices to three and the Superior Court judges to 
nine. The General Assembly was given the power to 
appoint justices of the peace, instead of the governor. 
Most of the modernizing changes in the post-Civil War 
Constitution, however, were left, and the judicial struc- 
ture it had established continued without systematic 
modification through more than half of the 20th cen- 
tury. (A further constitutional amendment approved by 
the voters in November, 1888, returned the Supreme 
Court membership to five, and the number of superior 
court judges to twelve.) 

Before Reorganization 

A multitude of legislative enactments to meet rising 
demands and to respond to changing needs had heavily 
encumbered the 1868 judicial structure by the time sys- 
tematic court reforms were proposed in the 1950's. This 
accrual of piecemeal change and addition to the court 
system was most evident at the lower, local court level, 
where hundreds of courts specially created by statute 
operated with widely dissimilar structure and jurisdiction. 

By 1965, when the implementation of the most recent 
major reforms was begun, the court system in North 
Carolina consisted of four levels: (a) the Supreme Court, 
with appellate jurisdiction; (b) the superior court, with 
general trial jurisdiction; (c) the local statutory courts 
of limited jurisdiction, and (d) justices of the peace and 
mayor's courts, with petty jurisdiction. 

At the superior court level, the State had been divided 
into 30 judicial districts and 21 solicitorial districts. The 
38 superior court judges (who rotated among the coun- 
ties) and the district solicitors were paid by the State. 
The clerk of superior court, who was judge of probate 
and often also a juvenile judge, was a county official. 
There were specialized branches of superior court in 
some counties for matters like domestic relations and 
juvenile offenses. 

The lower two levels were local courts. At the higher 
of these local court levels were more than 180 recorder- 
type courts. Among these were the county recorder's 
courts, municipal recorder's courts and township re- 
corder's courts; the general county courts, county crim- 
inal courts and special county courts; the domestic rela- 
tions courts and the juvenile courts. Some of these had 
been established individually by special legislative acts 
more than a half-century earlier. Others had been created 
by general law across the State since 1919. About half 
were county courts and half were city or township 
courts. Jurisdiction included misdemeanors (mostly 
traffic offenses), preliminary hearings and sometimes 
civil matters. The judges, who were usually part-time, 
were variously elected or appointed locally. 

At the lowest level were about 90 mayor's courts and 
some 925 justices of the peace. These officers had sim- 
ilar criminal jurisdiction over minor cases with penalties 
up to a $50 fine or 30 days in jail. The justices of the 



peace also had civil jurisdiction of minor cases. These 
court officials were compensated by the fees they 
exacted, and they provided their own facilities. 

Court Reorganization 

The need for a comprehensive evaluation and revi- 
sion of the court system received the attention and sup- 
port of Governor Luther H. Hodges in 1957, who 
encouraged the leadership of the North Carolina Bar 
Association to pursue the matter. A Court Study Com- 
mittee was established as an agency of the North Carol- 
ina Bar Association, and that Committee issued its 
report, calling for reorganization, at the end of 1958. A 
legislative Constitutional Commission, which worked 
with the Court Study Committee, finished its report 
early the next year. Both groups called for the structur- 
ing of an all-inclusive court system which would be 
directly state-operated, uniform in its organization 
throughout the State and centralized in its administra- 
tion. The plan was for a simplified, streamlined and 
unified structure. A particularly important part of the 
proposal was the elimination of the local satutory courts 
and their replacement by a single District Court; the 
office of justice of the peace was to be abolished, and 
the newly fashioned position of magistrate would func- 
tion within the District Court as a subordinate judicial 
office. 

Constitutional amendments were introduced in the 
legislature in 1959 but these failed to gain the required 
three-fifths vote of each house. The proposals were 
reintroduced and approved at the 1961 session. The 
Constitutional amendments were approved by popular 
vote in 1962, and three years later the General Assem- 
bly enacted statutes to put the system into effect by 
stages. By the end of 1970 all of the counties and their 
courts had been incorporated into the new system, 
whose unitary nature was symbolized by the name, 
General Court of Justice. The designation of the entire 
20th century judicial system as a single, statewide 
"court," with components for various types and levels 
of caseload, was adapted from North Carolina's earlier 
General Court, whose full venue extended to all of the 
17th century counties. 

After Reorganization 

Notwithstanding the comprehensive reorganization 
adopted in 1962, the impetus for changes has con- 
tinued. In 1965, the Constitution was amended to pro- 
vide for the creation of an intermediate Court of 
Appeals. It was amended again in 1972 to allow for the 
Supreme Court to censure or remove judges upon the 
recommendation of a Judicial Standards Commission. 
As for the selection of judges, persistent efforts were 
made in the 1970's to obtain legislative approval of 
amendments to the State Constitution, to appoint judges 
according to "merit" instead of electing them by popu- 
lar, partisan vote. The proposed amendments received 



HISTORICAL DEVELOPMENT OF THE NORTH CAROLINA COURT SYSTEM 

the backing of a majority of the members of each Hinsdale, C. E., County Government in North Carolina. 1965 

house, but not the three-fifths required to submit con- Edition. 

, , r . . Ti Lefler, Hugh Talmage and Albert Ray Newsome, North Carolina: 

stitutional amendments to a vote of the people. It seems The History ofa southern State. 1963 Edition. 

likely that this significant issue will be before the Sanders, John L., Constitutional Revision and Court Reform: A 

General Assembly again for consideration. Legislative History. 1959 Special Report of the N.C. Institute of 

Government. 
Major Sources Stevenson, George and Ruby D. Arnold, North Carolina Courts of 

Battle, Kemp P., An Address on the History of the Supreme Court Law and Equity Prior to 1868. N.C. Archives Information Circular 

(Delivered in 1888). 1 North Carolina Reports 835-876. 1973. 



THE PRESENT COURT SYSTEM 
Original Jurisdiction and Routes of Appeal 



Recommendations 

from Judicial 

Standards Commission 



SUPREME 
COURT 

7 Justices 



Original Jurisdiction 
All felony cases; civil 
cases in excess of 
$10,000* 





Final Order of 

Utilities Commission in 

General Rate Case 



COURT OF 
APPEALS 

12 Judges 



SUPERIOR 
COURTS 

74 Judges 



Decisions of 

Most Administrative 

Agencies 



Original Jurisdiction 
Probate and estates, 
special proceedings 
(condemnations, 
adoptions, partitions, 
foreclosures, etc.) 



criminal cases 
(for trial de novo) 



*(2> 

\l 



civil cases 



\ 



DISTRICT 
COURTS 

151 Judges 



Clerks of Superior 
Court 

(100) 



Magistrates 

(640) 



Decisions of Industrial 

Commission, State Bar, 

Property Tax Commission, 

Commissioner of Insurance, 

Bd. of State Contract Appeals 



Original Jurisdiction 
Misdemeanor cases not 
assigned to magistrates; 
probable cause hearings; 
civil cases $10,000* or 
less; juvenile proceedings; 
domestic relations; 
involuntary commitments 



Original Jurisdiction 
Accept certain misdemeanor 
guilty pleas: worthless check 
misdemeanors $1,000** or less; 
small claims $1,500 or less 



( 1 ) Appeals from the Court of Appeals to the Supreme Court are by right in Utilities Commission general rate cases, cases involving comstitutional 
questions, and cases in which there has been dissent in the Court of Appeals. In its discretion, the Supreme Court may review Court of Appeals 
decisions in cases of significant public interest or cases involving legal principles of major significance. 

(2) Appeals from these agencies lie directly to the Court of Appeals. 

(3) As a matter of right, appeals go directly to the Supreme Court in criminal cases in which the defendent has been sentenced to death or life 
imprisonment, and in civil cases involving the involuntary annexation of territory by a municipality of 5,000 or more population. In all other cases 
appeal as of right is to the Court of Appeals. In its discretion, the Supreme Court may hear appeals directly from the trial courts in cases where delay 
would cause substantial harm or the Court of Appeals docket is unusually full. (Under G.S. 7A-27, effective July 24, 1987, appeals in criminal cases 
as a matter of right are limited to first degree murder cases in which there is a sentence of death or life imprisonment.) 



*The district and superior courts have concurrent original jurisdiction in civil actions (G.S. 7A-242). However, the district court division is the proper 
division for the trial of civil actions in which the amount in controversy is $10,000 or less; and the superior court division is the proper division 
for the trial of civil actions in which the amount in controversy exceeds $10,000 (G.S. 7A-243). 
**Magistrate jurisdiction in worthless check cases increased from $500 to $1,000 effective October 1, 1987 (G.S. 7A-273). 



10 



THE PRESENT COURT SYSTEM 



Article IV of the North Carolina Constitution estab- 
lishes the General Court of Justice which "shall constitute 
a unified judicial system for purposes of jurisdiction, 
operation, and administration, and shall consist of an 
Appellate Division, a Superior Court Division, and a 
District Court Division." 

The Appellate Division is comprised of the Supreme 
Court and the Court of Appeals. 

The Superior Court Division is comprised of the super- 
ior courts which hold sessions in the county seats of the 
100 counties of the State. The counties are grouped into 
judicial districts (34 at the present time), and one or more 
superior court judges are elected for each of the judicial 
districts. A clerk of the superior court for each county is 
elected by the voters of the county. 

The District Court Division is comprised of the district 
courts. The General Assembly is authorized to divide the 
State into a convenient number of local court districts and 
prescribe where the district courts shall sit, but district 
court must sit in at least one place in each county. The 
General Assembly has provided that districts for pur- 
poses of the district court are coterminous with superior 
court judicial districts. The Constitution also provides for 
one or more magistrates to be appointed in each county 
"who shall be officers of the district court." 

The State Constitution (Art. IV, Sec. 1) also contains 
the term, "judicial department," stating that "The General 
Assembly shall have no power to deprive the judicial 
department of any power or jurisdiction that rightfully 
pertains to it as a co-ordinate department of the govern- 
ment, nor shall it establish or authorize any courts other 
than as permitted by this Article." The terms, "General 
Court of Justice" and "Judicial Department" are almost, 
but not quite, synonymous. It may be said that the Judi- 
cial Department encompasses all of the levels of court 
designated as the General Court of Justice plus all admin- 
istrative and ancillary services within the Judicial Depart- 
ment. 

The original jurisdictions and routes of appeal between 
the several levels of court in North Carolina's system of 
courts are illustrated in the chart on the opposite page. 

Criminal Cases 

Trial of misdemeanor cases is within the original juris- 
diction of the district courts. Some misdemeanor offenses 
are tried by magistrates, who are also empowered to 
accept pleas of guilty to certain offenses and impose fines 
in accordance with a schedule set by the Conference of 
Chief District Court Judges. Most trials of misdemeanors 
are by district court judges, who also hold preliminary, 
"probable cause" hearings in felony cases. Trial of felony 
cases is within the jurisdiction of the superior courts. 

Decisions of magistrates may be appealed to the district 
court judge. In criminal cases there is no trial by jury 
available at the district court level; appeal from the dis- 
trict courts' judgments in criminal cases is to the superior 
courts for trial de novo before a jury. Except in life- 
imprisonment or death sentence cases (which are appealed 



to the Supreme Court), appeal from the superior courts is 
to the Court of Appeals. 

Civil Cases 

The 100 clerks of superior court are ex officio judges of 
probate and have original jurisdiction in probate and 
estates matters. The clerks also have jurisdiction over 
such special proceedings as adoptions, partitions, con- 
demnations under the authority of eminent domain, and 
foreclosures. Rulings of the clerk may be appealed to the 
superior court. 

The district courts have original jurisdiction in juvenile 
proceedings, domestic relations cases, petitions for invol- 
untary commitment to a mental hospital, and are the 
"proper" courts for general civil cases where the amount 
in controversy is $10,000 or less. If the amount in con- 
troversy is $1,500 or less and the plaintiff in the case so 
requests, the chief district court judge may assign the case 
for initial hearing by a magistrate. Magistrates' decisions 
may be appealed to the district court. Trial by jury for 
civil cases is available in the district courts; appeal from 
the judgment of a district court in a civil case is to the 
North Carolina Court of Appeals. 

The superior courts are the proper courts for trial of 
general civil cases where the amount in controversy is 
more than $10,000. Appeals from decisions of most 
administrative agencies are first within the jurisdiction of 
the superior courts. Appeal from the superior courts in 
civil cases is to the Court of Appeals. 

Administration 

The North Carolina Supreme Court has the "general 
power to supervise and control the proceedings of any of 
the other courts of the General Court of Justice." (G.S. 
7A-32(b)). 

In addition to this grant of general supervisory power, 
the North Carolina General Statutes provide certain 
Judicial Department officials with specific powers and 
responsibilities for the operation of the court system. The 
Supreme Court has the responsibility for prescribing 
rules of practice and procedures for the appellate courts 
and for prescribing rules for the trial courts to supplement 
those prescribed by statute. The Chief Justice of the 
Supreme Court designates one of the judges of the Court 
of Appeals to be its Chief Judge, who in turn is responsi- 
ble for scheduling the sessions of the Court of Appeals. 

The chart on page 1 1 illustrates specific responsibilities 
for administration of the trial courts vested in Judicial 
Department officials by statute. The Chief Justice 
appoints the Director and an Assistant Director of the 
Administrative Office of the Courts; this Assistant Direc- 
tor also serves as the Chief Justice's administrative assist- 
ant. The schedule of sessions of superior court in the 100 
counties is set by the Supreme Court; assignment of the 
State's rotating superior court judges is the responsibility 
of the Chief Justice. Finally, the Chief Justice designates a 
chief district court judge for each of the State's 34 judicial 



11 



THE PRESENT COURT SYSTEM 



districts from among the elected district court judges of 
the respective districts. These judges have responsibilities 
for the scheduling of the district courts and magistrates' 
courts within their respective districts, along with other 
administrative responsibilities. 

The Administrative Office of the Courts is responsible 
for direction of non-judicial, administrative and business 
affairs of the Judicial Department. Included among its 
functions are fiscal management, personnel services, 
information and statistical services, supervision of record 
keeping in the trial court clerks' offices, liaison with the 
legislative and executive departments of government, 
court facility evaluation, purchase and contract, educa- 
tion and training, coordination of the program for provi- 
sion of legal counsel to indigent persons, juvenile proba- 



tion and after-care, trial court administrator services, 
planning, and general administrative services. 

The clerk of superior court in each county acts as clerk 
for both the superior and district courts. Until 1980, the 
clerk also served as chairman of the county's calendar 
committee, which set the civil case calendars. Effective 
July 1, 1980, these committees were eliminated; day-to- 
day calendaring of civil cases is now done by the clerk of 
superior court or by a "trial court administrator" in some 
districts, under the supervision of the senior resident 
superior court judge and chief district court judge. The 
criminal case calendars in both superior and district 
courts are set by the district attorney of the respective 
district. 



12 



THE PRESENT COURT SYSTEM 
Principal Administrative Authorities for North Carolina Trial Courts 




CHIEF JUSTICE 

and 

SUPREME COURT 



l 



Administrative 

Office of 

the Courts 



i 



(35) District 
Attorneys 



(34) Senior Resident 

Judges; (100) Clerks 

of Superior Court 

SUPERIOR 
COURTS 




(34) Chief District 
Court Judges 

DISTRICT 
COURTS 



'The Supreme Court has general supervisory authority over the operations of the superior courts (as well as other trial 
courts). The schedule of superior courts is approved by the Supreme Court; assignments of superior court judges, who 
rotate from district to district, are the responsibility of the Chief Justice. 

2 The Director and an Assistant Director of the Administrative Office of the Courts are appointed by and serve at the 
pleasure of the Chief Justice. 

3 The Supreme Court has general supervisory authority over the operations of the district courts (as well as other trial 
courts). The Chief Justice appoints a chief district court judge in each of the 34 judicial districts from the judges elected in 
the respective districts. 

4 The Administrative Office of the Courts is empowered to prescribe a variety of rules governing the operation of the 
offices of the 100 clerks of superior court, and to obtain statistical data and other information from officials in the 
Judicial Department. 

5 The district attorney sets the criminal-case trial calendars. In each district, the senior resident superior court judge and 
the chief district court judge are empowered to supervise the calendaring procedures for civil cases in their respective 
courts. 

6 In addition to certain judicial functions, the clerk of superior court performs administrative, fiscal and record-keeping 
functions for both the superior court and district court of his county. Magistrates, who serve under the supervision of the 
chief district court judge, are appointed by the senior resident superior court judge from nominees submitted by the clerk 
of superior court. 



13 



THE SUPREME COURT OF NORTH CAROLINA 

(As of June 30, 1988) 



Chief Justice 
JAMES G. EXUM, JR. 



LOUIS B. MEYER 
BURLEY B. MITCHELL, JR. 
HARRY C. MARTIN 



Associate Justices 



HENRY E. FRYE 

JOHN WEBB 

WILLIS P. WHICHARD 



Retired Chief Justices 

WILLIAM H. BOBBITT 

SUSIE SHARP 

JOSEPH BRANCH 



I. BEVERLY LAKE 
J. FRANK HUSKINS 



Retired Justices 



DAVID M. BRITT 



Clerk 
J. Gregory Wallace 



Librarian 
Frances H. Hall 




ORGANIZATION AND OPERATIONS IN 1987-88 



The Supreme Court 



At the apex of the North Carolina court system is the 
seven-member Supreme Court, which sits in Raleigh to 
consider and decide questions of law presented in civil 
and criminal cases on appeal. The Chief Justice and six 
associate justices are elected to eight-year terms by the 
voters of the State. There are two terms of the Supreme 
Court each year: a Spring Term commencing on the first 
Tuesday in February and a Fall Term commencing on the 
first Tuesday in September. The Court does not sit in 
panels. It sits only en banc, that is, all members sitting on 
each case. 

Jurisdiction 

The only original case jurisdiction exercised by the 
Supreme Court is in the censure and removal of judges 
upon the (non-binding) recommendations of the Judicial 
Standards Commission. The Court's appellate jurisdic- 
tion includes: 

- cases on appeal by right from the Court of Appeals 
(cases involving substantial constitutional ques- 
tions and cases in which there has been dissent in 
the Court of Appeals); 

- cases on appeal by right from the Utilities Commis- 
sion (cases involving final order or decision in a 
general rate matter); 

- criminal cases on appeal by right from the superior 
courts (cases in which the defendant has been sen- 
tenced to death or life imprisonment); and 

- cases in which review has been granted in the 
Supreme Court's discretion. 

Discretionary review by the Supreme Court directly 
from the trial courts may be granted when delay would 
likely cause subsantial harm or when the workload of the 
Appellate Division is such that the expeditious adminis- 
tration of justice requires it. However, most appeals are 
heard only after review by the Court of Appeals. 

Administration 

The Supreme Court has general power to supervise and 
control the proceedings of the other courts of the General 
Court of Justice. The Court has specific power to pre- 
scribe the rules of practice and procedure for the trial 
court divisions, consistent with any rules enacted by the 
General Assembly. The schedule of superior court ses- 
sions in the 100 counties is approved yearly, by the 
Supreme Court. The Clerk of the Supreme Court, the 
Librarian of the Supreme Court Library, and the Appel- 



late Division Reporter are appointed by the Supreme 
Court. 

The Chief Justice of the Supreme Court appoints the 
Director of the Administrative Office of the Courts and 
an Assistant Director, who serve at the pleasure of the 
Chief Justice. He also designates a Chief Judge from 
among the judges of the Court of Appeals and a Chief 
District Court Judge from among the district judges in 
each of the State's 34 judicial districts. He assigns superior 
court judges, who regularly rotate from district to district, 
to the scheduled sessions of superior court in the 100 
counties, and he is also empowered to transfer district 
court judges to other districts for temporary or special- 
ized duty. The Chief Justice appoints three of the seven 
members of the Judicial Standards Commission — a judge 
of the Court of Appeals who serves as the Commission's 
chairman, one superior court judge and one district court 
judge. The Chief Justice also appoints six of the 24 voting 
members of the N.C. Courts Commission: one associate 
justice of the Supreme Court; one Court of Appeals 
judge; two superior court judges; and two district court 
judges. The Chief Justice also appoints the Appellate 
Defender, and the Chief Hearing Officer of the Office of 
Administrative Hearings. 

Expenses of the Court, 1987-88 

Operating expenses of the Supreme Court during the 
1987-88 fiscal year amounted to $2,352,654, an increase of 
3.1% over total 1986-87 expenditures of $2,281,161. 
Expenditures for the Supreme Court during 1 987-88 con- 
stituted 1.4% of all General Fund expenditures for the 
operation of the entire Judicial Department during the 
fiscal year. 

Case Data, 1987-88 

A total of 309 appealed cases were before the Supreme 
Court during the fiscal year, 164 that were pending on 
July 1,1987 plus 145 cases filed through June 30, 1988. A 
total of 216 of these cases were disposed of, leaving 93 
cases pending on June 30, 1988. 

A total of 801 petitions (requests to appeal) were before 
the Court during the 1987-88 year, with 726 disposed 
during the year and 76 pending as of June 30, 1988. The 
Court granted 67 petitions for review during 1987-88 
compared to 99 for 1986-87. 

More detailed data on the Court's workload is pres- 
ented on the following pages. 



15 



ORGANIZATION AND OPERATIONS IN 1987-88 

Supreme Court Caseload Inventory 

July 1, 1987-June 30, 1988 



Petitions for Review 

Civil domestic 

Juvenile 

Other civil 

Criminal 

Postconviction remedy 

Administrative agency decision 

Total Petitions for Review 



Pending 






Pending 


7/1/87 


Filed 


Disposed 


6/30/88 


5 


5 


8 


2 


1 


2 


3 





63 


292 


313 


42 


78 


298 


351 


25 


10 


35 


39 


6 


9 


3 


12 






166 



635 



726 



75 



Appeals 

Civil domestic 

Petitions for review granted that became civil domestic appeals 

Juvenile 

Petitions for review granted that became juvenile appeals 

Other civil 

Petitions for review granted that became other civil appeals 

Criminal, defendant sentenced to death 

Criminal, defendant sentenced to life imprisonment 

Other criminal 

Petitions for review granted that became other criminal appeals 

Petitions for review granted that became postconviction 

remedy cases 
Administrative agency decision 
Petitions for review granted that became appeals of 

administrative agency decision 

Total Appeals 

Other Proceedings 

Rule 16(b) additional issues re dissent 

Extraordinary writs 

Requests for advisory opinion 

Rule amendments 

Motions 

Rule 31 Petitions to Rehear 






3 


3 





2 


3 


4 


I 


























22 


15 


29 


8 


22 


41 


40 


23 


24 


11 


14 


21 


69 


47 


93 


23 


5 


1! 


11 


5 


11 


9 


11 


9 














6 


2 


5 


3 


3 


3 


6 





164 


145 


216 


93 





8 


8 








58 


58 








1 


1 








17 


17 








589 


589 





1 


18 


15 


4 



Total Other Proceedings 



691 



688 



16 



ORGANIZATION AND OPERATIONS IN FISCAL YEAR 1987-88 

APPEALS FILED IN THE SUPREME COURT 
JULY 1, 1987 - JUNE 30, 1988 



CRIMINAL-DEATH 



CRIMINAL LIFE 



ADMIN. AGENCY 



DOMESTIC RELATIONS 




OTHER CIVIL 



OTHER CRIMINAL 



PETITIONS FILED IN THE SUPREME COURT 
JULY 1, 1987 - JUNE 30, 1988 



OTHER CIVIL 



JUVENILE 0.3%(2) 



CRIMINAL 




ADMIN. AGENCY 0.5% (3) 
DOMESTIC RELATIONS 1%(5) 

POST-CONVICTION 



17 



ORGANIZATION AND OPERATIONS IN 1987-88 

Supreme Court Caseload Types by Judicial District and Division 

July 1, 1987-June 30, 1988 



Judicial 


Judicial 


Total 


Death 


Life 


Other 


Civil 


Other 


Cases 


Division 


District 


Cases 


Cases 


Cases 


Criminal 


Cases 


Cases 


Disposed 


I 


1 


3 





3 











2 




2 


7 





5 


! 


1 





4 




3A 


4 


1 


2 





1 





3 




3B 


3 





1 





2 





3 




4 


12 


2 


5 


1 


4 





8 




5 


13 


1 


11 





1 





7 




6 


9 


3 


4 


2 








5 




7 


6 


1 


2 





3 





5 




X 


8 





6 





2 





6 


SUBTOTAL 




65 


8 


39 


4 


84 





43 


II 


9 


6 


1 


2 


2 


1 





4 




10 


48 


3 


5 


5 


19 


16 


35 




II 


6 





2 


1 


3 





4 




12 


19 


1 


13 


4 


1 





12 




13 


2 


1 


1 











1 




14 


14 





7 


4 


3 





11 




15A 


7 


1 


3 


1 


2 





6 




15B 


11 





5 





6 





6 




16 


11 





4 











6 




16A 


1 


1 

















SUBTOTAL 




125 


15 


42 


17 


35 


16 


85 


III 


17A 


2 


2 














1 




17B 


3 


1 





1 


1 





3 




18 


20 


1 


4 


2 


13 





15 




19A 


6 


1 


4 





1 





3 




19B 


II 











1 










20 


90 


1 


4 





4 





4 




21 


2! 





15 





6 





8 




22 


16 


5 


6 


1 


4 





12 




23 


7! 





5 





2 





6 


SUBTOTAL 




85 


11 


38 


4 


32 





52 


IV 


24 


3 








2 


1 





2 




25 


10 


3 


3 


1 


3 





3 




26 


14 





2 


4 


8 





6 




27A 


10 


1 


6 


1 


2 





7 




27B 


2 





1 





1 





2 




28 


11 


I 


4 


1 


6 





6 




29 


12 


3 


81 


1 








5 




30 


6 


1 


3 


1 


I 





4 


SUBTOTAL 




68 


9 


27 


10 


22 





35 



TOTALS 343 43 146 35 103 16 216 

NOTE: Includes life and death sentence cases awaiting Record on Appeal and not yet formally docketed. 



18 



ORGANIZATION AND OPERATIONS IN 1987-88 

Submission of Cases Reaching Decision Stage in Supreme Court 

July 1, 1987-June 30, 1988 



Cases Argued 

Civil 
Criminal 

Total cases argued 



70 
119 

189 



Submissions Without Argument 

By motion of the parties (Appellate Rule 30 (d)) 
By order of the Court (Appellate Rule 30 (f)) 

Total submissions without argument 

Total Cases Reaching Decision Stage 



7 


7 
196 



Disposition of Petitions and Other Proceedings by the Supreme Court 

July 1, 1987-June 30, 1988 



Petitions for Review 


Granted* 


Denied 


Dismissed/ 
Withdrawn 


Total 
Disposed 


Civil Domestic 

Juvenile 

Other Civil 

Criminal 

Postconviction Remedy 

Administrative Agency Decision 


3 


48 

13 

3 


20 

5 

189 

244 

12 

3 


2 
2 
8 

10 

27 




25 

7 

245 

267 

39 

6 


Total Petitions for Review 


67 


473 


49 


589 


Other Proceedings 










Rule 16(b) — Additional Issues 
Extraordinary Writs 
Advisory Opinion 
Rule Amendments 
Motions 








8 
58 

1 

17 

489 



Total Other Proceedings 

♦"GRANTED" includes orders allowing relief without accepting the case as a full appeal. 



573 



19 



ORGANIZATION AND OPERATIONS IN 1987-88 
Disposition of Supreme Court Appeals With Signed Opinions 











Reversed 




Total 


Case Types 


Affirmed 


Modified 


Reversed 


Remanded 


Remanded 


Disposed 


Civil domestic 


1 


1 


2 


2 





6 


Juvenile 




















Other civil 


16 


5 


5 


2:; 


it 


54 


Criminal (death sentence) 


6 








4 


d 


14 


Criminal (life sentence) 


71 








13 


6 


90 


Other criminal 


5 





4 


6 





15 


Postconviction remedy 














(! 





Administrative agency decision 


2 








7 





9 



Totals 



101 



1! 



60 



10 



188 



Disposition of Supreme Court Appeals with Per Curiam Decision 











Reversed 




Total 


Case Types 


Affirmed 


Modified 


Reversed 


Remanded 


Remanded 


Disposed 


Civil domestic 


1 











i) 


1 


Juvenile 




















Other civil 


12 








1 





13 


Criminal (death sentence) 




















Criminal (life sentence) 

















1 


Other criminal 


5 














5 


Postconviction remedy 


{» 

















Administrative agency decision 


1 








1 





2 



Totals 



20 



22 



Disposition of Supreme Court Appeals by Dismissal or Withdrawal 



Case Types 



Dismissed or 
Withdrawn 



Civil domestic 

Juvenile 

Other civil 

Criminal (death sentence) 

Criminal (life sentence) 

Other criminal 

Post-conviction remedy 

Administrative agency decision 



Totals 



20 



ORGANIZATION AND OPERATIONS IN FISCAL YEAR 1987-88 

MANNER OF DISPOSITION OF APPEALS IN THE SUPREME COURT 

JULY 1, 1987-JUNE 30, 1988 



DISMISSED/WITHDRAWN 3% 

(6) 



OPINIONS 




PER CURIAM DECISIONS 



TYPE OF DISPOSITION OF PETITIONS FOR REVIEW IN THE SUPREME COURT 

JULY 1, 1987-JUNE 30, 1988 



GRANTED 



DENIED 




DISMISSED/ WITHDRAWN 



2! 



NORTH CAROLINA SUPREME COURT 
Appeals Docketed and Disposed of During the Years, 1982-83—1987-88 



400 



H 



Appeals Docketed 
Appeals Disposed of 



300 



N 
II 
M 
B 
E 
R 

O 

1 

C 

A 

s 
I 

s 



200 



100 



209 



1982-83 



20 1 



I92 



227 



177 



1984-84 1984-85 



220 



209 



1985-86 



200 



196 



216 



145 



1986-87 1987-88 



22 



NORTH CAROLINA SUPREME COURT 
Petitions Docketed and Allowed During the Years, 1982-83—1987-88 



800 



600 



N 
11 
M 
B 
E 
R 

O 
h 

C 

A 
S 
I 

s 



400 



200 



H 



Petitions Docketed 
Petitions Allowed 




1982-83 



70 



1983-84 




1984-85 



1985-86 



1986-87 



67 



1987-88 



23 



ORGANIZATION AND OPERATIONS IN 1987-88 



Supreme Court Processing Time for Disposed Cases 

(Total time in days from docketing to decision) 

July 1, 1987-June 30, 1988 



Civil domestic 

Petitions for review granted that became civil domestic appeals 

Juvenile 

Petitions for review granted that became juvenile appeals 

Other civil 

Petitions for review granted that became other civil appeals 

Criminal, defendant sentenced to death 

Criminal, defendant sentenced to life imprisonment 

Other criminal 

Petitions for review granted that became other criminal appeals 

Petitions tor review granted that became postconviction remedy cases 

Administrative agency decision 

Petitions for review granted that became appeals of administrative 
agency decision 

Total appeals 



Number 


(Days) 


(Days) 


of Cases 


Median 


Mean 


3 


190 


197.3 


4 


271 


238.0 




















29 


184 


222.4 


40 


186 


200.9 


14 


462 


475.4 


93 


282 


495.2 


II 


188 


236.0 


II 


337 


325.6 











5 


273 


363.4 


6 


154 


219.0 


216 


256 


361.0 



24 



THE COURT OF APPEALS OF NORTH CAROLINA* 



Chief Judge 
R.A. HEDRICK 



GERALD ARNOLD 
HUGH A. WELLS 
CHARLES L. BECTON 
CLIFTON E. JOHNSON 
EUGENE H. PHILLIPS 
SIDNEY S. EAGLES, JR. 



Judges 



SARAH PARKER 

JACK COZORT 

ROBERT F. ORR 

K. EDWARD GREENE 

DONALD L. SMITH 



HUGH B. CAMPBELL 
FRANK M. PARKER 
EDWARD B. CLARK 



Retired Judges 



ROBERT M. MARTIN 

CECIL J. HILL 

MAURICE BRASWELL 



Clerk 
FRANCIS E. DAIL 



*Asof 30 June 1988 



25 



ORGANIZATION AND OPERATIONS IN 1987-88 



The Court of Appeals 



The 12-judge Court of Appeals is North Carolina's 
intermediate appellate court; it hears a majority of the 
appeals originating from the State's trial courts. The 
Court regularly sits in Raleigh, and it may sit in other 
locations in the State as authorized by the Supreme 
Court. Sessions outside of Raleigh have not been regular 
or frequent. Judges of the Court of Appeals are elected by 
popular vote for eight-year terms. A Chief Judge for the 
Court is designated by the Chief Justice of the Supreme 
Court and serves in that capacity at the pleasure of the 
Chief Justice. 

Cases are heard by panels of three judges, with the 
Chief Judge responsible for assigning members of the 
Court to the four panels. Insofar as practicable, each 
judge is to be assigned to sit a substantially equal number 
of times with each other judge. The Chief Judge presides 
over the panel of which he or she is a member and desig- 
nates a presiding judge for the other panels. 

One member of the Court of Appeals, designated by the 
Chief Justice of the Supreme Court, serves as chairman of 
the Judicial Standards Commission. 

Jurisdiction 

The bulk of the caseload of the Court of Appeals con- 
sists of cases appealed from the trial courts. The Court 
also hears appeals directly from the Industrial Commis- 
sion; certain final orders or decisions of the North Caro- 
lina State Bar; and the Commissioner of Insurance; the 
State Board of Contract Appeals; and appeals from cer- 
tain final orders or decisions of the Property Tax Com- 
mission. (Appeals from the decisions of other administra- 



tive agencies lie first within the jurisdiction of the superior 
courts.) 

In the event of a recommendation from the Judicial 
Standards Commission to censure or remove from office 
a justice of the Supreme Court, the (non-binding) recom- 
mendation would be considered by the Chief Judge and 
the six judges next senior in service on the Court of 
Appeals (excluding the judge who serves as the Commis- 
sion's chairman). Such seven-member panel would have 
sole jurisdiction to act upon the Commission's recom- 
mendation. 

Expenses of the Court, 1987-88 

Operating expenses of the Court of Appeals during the 
1987-88 fiscal year totalled $3,158,383, an increase of 
7.2% over 1986-87 expenditures of $2,947,010. Expendi- 
tures for the Court of Appeals during 1987-88 amounted 
to 1 .9% of all General Fund expenditures for operation of 
the entire Judicial Department during the fiscal year. 

Case Data, 1987-88 

A total of 1,351 appealed cases were filed before the 
Court of Appeals during the period July 1, 1987 — 
June 30, 1988. A total of 1,272 cases were disposed of 
during the same period. During 1987-88, a total of 446 
petitions and 1 ,39 1 motions were filed before the Court of 
Appeals. 

Further detail on the workload of the Court of Appeals 
is shown in the tables and graphs on the following pages. 



26 



FILINGS AND DISPOSITIONS IN THE COURT OF APPEALS 
July 1, 1987-June 30, 1988 



Cases on Appeal 

Civil cases appealed from district courts 
Civil cases appealed from superior courts 
Civil cases appealed from administrative agencies 
Criminal cases appealed from superior courts 

Total 



Filings 

309 

515 

44 

483 

1,351 



Dispositions 



1,272 



Petitions 

Allowed 

Denied 

Remanded 

Total 



446 



71 

375 



446 



Motions 

Allowed 

Denied 

Remanded 

Total 



Total Cases on Appeal, Petitions and Motions 





961 




430 







1,391 


1,391 


3,188 


3,109 



MANNER OF CASE DISPOSITIONS COURT OF APPEALS 

July 1, 1987-June 30, 1988 
Cases Disposed by Written Opinion 







Cases Affirmed 






Cases 


Cases 


In Part, Reversed 


Other Cases 


Total Cases 


Affirmed 


Reversed 


In Part 


Disposed 


Disposed 



833 



252 



85 



102 



1,272 



27 



FILINGS AND DISPOSITIONS IN THE COURT OF APPEALS 



Fiscal Years 1982-83 Through 1987-88 



3000 




1982-83 



1983-84 



1984-85 



1985-86 



1986-87 



1987-88 



Filings and dispositions in this graph include appealed cases and petitions (not motions) in the Court of Appeals. 



28 





c 




o 




0D3 




6/5 


s 


> 


w 


5 


H 
c/3 


a 


>- 


« 


GO 


(/) 




*■> 


H 


u 


tt 




£ 


1/5 


O 


Q 


u 


__ 




a 


H 


%i 


Z 


TJ 


w 


3 


CD 


-S 


w 


A 


OS 





w 




K 


u 


H 


JZ 




+* 




u 




O 




z 




c5 

6/ 


(LI 

e 


15 

3 


■ 

3 
O 


u -o 


■a >> 
2 




<L> 

a! 


y 


3 


O 
■— 

a. 




3 3 

8* 




o 




00 


u ■- 

o i: 
x S3 

.H 13 

5 "C 


2 § 




'£ 






'£ 




VI 


Cfl 


"3 


wa 


CO '_2 




■3 

.1 


-o 
q 


3 
3 


•3 


& "3 




'3 


w 


.c 


c/3 o 


o o 




u 


C 




'•5 3 


o *■• 




•a 


u 


o 


_c 


« 3 




3 








_j CJ 


1> (J 






yj 


u 


_E 


«* & 


•5 u 












. — V5 


*-; c/5 




»tf 


T3 


c 


'5 
va 


o o 


C o 




m 


E 


w 


'"2 (X 

3 "" 


3 u. 
O D. 




c 


o 


s 


u 


U U-. 






<U 


c 


4= '"■ 


O ^ 




"5 
o 


u 

c5 


CO 


3 

O 

u 


3 








o 


u- 


c 


W o 

so 


CQ u 




03 


t— 


>. 




0. l> 
J3 




!M 


<u 


r IJ 


u 


u 


T3 *3 




S3 

C 
O 


ah 

■a 

3 

u 
3 


o 

IE 


3 
O 
U 

;g 

o 




C « 

« 8 


U 

CO 

■3 


U 


O 

o 


c 


o 


■*-> en 

W5 --h 




"5 


o 


c 
o 


-a 
u 

c 


■■3 
15-2 




u 

■3 


I— 


aj 


CO 


5P 


> i; 


3 


o 


3 

C/) 


> 

-5 


CO 
«5 


"C ■a 2 .23 

2hUQ 


— i 



29 



JUDGES OF SUPERIOR COURT* 



(As of June 30, 1988) 



District 

1 

2 
3 



[0 



12 
13 

14 



FIRST DIVISION 

J. Herbert Small, Elizabeth City 
Thomas S. Watts, Elizabeth City 

William C. Griffin, Jr., Williamston 

David E. Reid, Jr., Greenville 

Herbert O. Phillips, III, Morehead City 

Henry L. Stevens, III, Kenansville 
James R. Strickland, Jacksonville 

Bradford Tillery, Wilmington 
Napoleon B. Barefoot, Wilmington 

Richard B. Allsbrook, Roanoke Rapids 

Franklin R. Brown, Tarboro 
Charles B. Winberry, Rocky Mount 

James D. Llewellyn, Kinston 
Paul M. Wright, Goldsboro 

SECOND DIVISION 

Robert H. Hobgood, Louisburg 
Henry W. Hight, Jr., Henderson 

Robert L. Farmer, Raleigh 
Henry V. Barnette, Jr., Raleigh 
Donald W. Stephens, Raleigh 
Howard E. Manning, Jr., Raleigh 

Wiley F. Bowen, Dunn 

Darius B. Herring, Jr., Fayetteville 
Coy E. Brewer, Jr., Fayetteville 
Edwin L. Johnson, Fayetteville 

Giles R. Clark, Elizabethtown 

Thomas H. Lee, Durham 
Anthony M. Brannon, Durham 
James M. Read, Durham 



15A Jasper B. Allen, Jr., Burlington 
15B F. Gordon Battle, Hillsboro 
16 B. Craig Ellis, Laurinburg 



District 

17A 

17B 



19A 

19B 

20 

21 

22 
23 

24 

25 

26 



27A 

27B 

28 

29 
30 



THIRD DIVISION 

Melzer A. Morgan, Jr., Wentworth 

James M. Long, Pilot Mountain 

W. Douglas Albright, Greensboro 
Thomas W. Ross, Greensboro 
Joseph John, Greensboro 
Ralph A. Walker, Greensboro 

Thomas W. Seay, Jr., Spencer 
James C. Davis, Concord 

Russell G. Walker, Jr., Asheboro 

F. Fetzer Mills, Wadesboro 
William H. Helms, Wingate 

William Z. Wood, Winston-Salem 
Judson D. DeRamus, Jr., Winston-Salem 
William H. Freeman, Winston-Salem 

Robert A. Collier, Jr., Statesville 
C. Preston Cornelius, Morresville 

Julius A. Rousseau, Jr., North Wilkesboro 

FOURTH DIVISION 

Charles C. Lamm, Jr., Boone 

Forrest A. Ferrell, Hickory 
Claude S. Sitton, Morganton 

Frank W. Snepp, Jr., Charlotte 
Robert M. Burroughs, Charlotte 
Kenneth A. Griffin, Charlotte 
Chase B. Saunders, Charlotte 
W. Terry Sherrill, Charlotte 

Robert W. Kirby, Cherryville 
Robert E. Gaines, Gastonia 

John M. Gardner, Shelby 

Robert D. Lewis, Asheville 
C. Walter Allen, Asheville 

Hollis M. Owens, Jr., Rutherfordton 

James U. Downs, Franklin 
Janet M. Hyatt, Waynesville 



'In districts with more than one resident judge, the senior resident judge is listed first. 



30 



SPECIAL JUDGES OF SUPERIOR COURT 



James A. Beaty, Jr., Winston-Salem 
John B. Lewis, Jr., Farmville 
Richard D. Boner, Charlotte 
Bruce B. Briggs, Mars Hill 
Jack B. Crawley, Jr., Raleigh 



Marvin K. Gray, Charlotte 
Lamar Gudger, Asheville 
I. Beverly Lake, Jr., Raleigh 
Carlton E. Fellers, Raleigh 
Samuel T. Currin, Raleigh 



EMERGENCY JUDGES OF SUPERIOR COURT 

Henry A. McKinnon, Jr., Lumberton 

Samuel E. Britt, Lumberton 

James H. Pou Bailey, Raleigh 



The Conference of Superior Court Judges 

(Officers as of June 30, 1988) 

James M. Long, Pilot Mountain, President 

Robert D. Lewis, Asheville, President- Elect 

William Z. Wood, Winston-Salem, Vice President 

Edwin L. Johnson, Fayetteville, Secretary-Treasurer 

D. B. Herring, Jr., Fayetteville and 
James R. Strickland, Jacksonville, 
Additional Executive Commit te Member 




Judge James M. Long 



31 



ORGANIZATION AND OPERATIONS IN 1987-88 



The Superior Courts 



North Carolina's superior courts are the general juris- 
diction trial courts for the state. In 1987-88, there were 64 
"resident" superior court judges elected to office in the 34 
judicial districts for eight-year terms by Statewide ballot. 
In addition, ten "special" superior court judges are 
appointed by the Governor. 

Jurisdiction 



The superior court has original jurisdiction in all felony 
cases and in those misdemeanor cases which originate by 
grand jury indictment. (Most misdemeanors are tried first 
in the district court, from which conviction may be 
appealed to the superior court for trial de novo by a jury. 
No trial by jury is available for criminal cases in district 
court.) The superior court is the proper court for the trial 
of civil cases where the amount in controversy exceeds 
$10,000, and it has jurisdiction over appeals from admin- 
istrative agencies except the Industrial Commission, cer- 
tain rulings of the Commissioner of Insurance, the Board 
of Bar Examiners of the North Carolina State Bar, the 
Board of State Contract Appeals, and the Property Tax 
Commission. Appeals from these agencies lie directly to 
the North Carolina Court of Appeals. Regardless of the 
amount in controversy, the original civil jurisdiction of 
the superior court does not include domestic relations 
cases, which are heard in the district courts, or probate 
and estates matters and certain special proceedings heard 
first by the clerk of superior court. Rulings of the clerk are 
within the appellate jurisdiction of the superior court. 

Administration 

The 100 counties of North Carolina were grouped into 
34 judicial districts during 1986-87. Each district has at 
least one resident superior court judge who has certain 
administrative responsibilities for his home district, such 
as providing for civil case calendaring procedures. (Crimi- 
nal case calendars are prepared by the district attorneys.) 
In districts with more than one resident superior court 
judge, the judge senior in service on the superior court 
bench exercises these supervisory powers. 



The judicial districts are grouped into four divisions for 
the rotation of superior court judges, as shown on the 
map on Page 31. Within the division, a resident superior 
court judge is required to rotate among the judicial dis- 
tricts, holding court for at least six months in each, then 
moving on to his next assignment. A special superior 
court judge may be assigned to hold court in any of the 
100 counties. Assignments of all superior court judges are 
made by the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court. Under 
the Constitution of North Carolina, at least two sessions 
(a week each) of superior court are held annually in each 
of the 100 counties. The vast majority of counties have 
more than the constitutional minimum of two weeks of 
superior court annually. Many larger counties have 
superior court in session about every week in the year. 

Expenditures 

A total of $1 5,978,747 was expended on the operations 
of the superior courts during the 1987-88 fiscal year. This 
included the salaries and travel expenses for the 74 super- 
ior court judges, and salaries and expenses for court 
reporters and secretarial staff for superior court judges. 
The 1 987-88 expenditures for the superior courts amount- 
ed to 9.65% of total General Fund expenditures for the 
operations of the entire Judicial Department during the 
1987-88 fiscal year. 

Caseload 

Including both civil and criminal cases, a total of 
105,704 cases were filed in the superior courts during 
1987-88, an increase of 6,818 cases (6.9%) from the total 
of 98,886 cases that were filed in 1986-87. There were 
increases in filings in all case categories: civil cases, felo- 
nies, and misdemeanor appeals. 

Superior court case dispositions increased from 96,308 
in 1986-87 to 100,808 in 1987-88. Dispositions of civil and 
felony cases increased, while dispositions of misdemeanor 
appeals decreased. 

More detailed information on the flow of cases through 
the superior courts is included in Part IV of this Report. 



32 



DISTRICT COURT JUDGES* 
(As of June 30, 1988) 



District 

1 John T. Chaffin, Elizabeth City 
Grafton G. Beaman, Elizabeth City 
John R. Parker, Manteo 

2 Hallett S. Ward, Washington 
Samuel G. Grimes, Washington 
James W. Hardison, Wiliamston 

3 E. Burt Aycock, Jr., Greenville 
J. Randal Hunter, New Bern 

Willie L. Lumpkin, III, Morehead City 

James E. Martin, Bethel 

James E. Ragan, Oriental 

H. Horton Rountree, Greenville 

4 Kenneth W. Turner, Rose Hill 
William M. Cameron, Jr., Jacksonville 
Wayne G. Kimble, Jr., Jacksonville 
Leonard W. Thagard, Clinton 
Stephen M. Williamson, Kenansville 

5 Gilbert H. Burnett, Wilmington 
Jacqueline Morris-Goodson, Wilmington 
Charles E. Rice, III, Wilmington 

Elton Glenn Tucker, Wilmington 

6 Nicholas Long, Roanoke Rapids 
Harold P. McCoy, Scotland Neck 
Robert E. Williford, Lewiston 

7 George Britt, Tarboro 
Allen W. Harrell, Wilson 
Quentin T. Sumner, Rocky Mount 
Albert S. Thomas, Jr., Wilson 

8 J. Patrick Exum, Kinston 
Kenneth R. Ellis, Fremont 
Rodney R. Goodman, Kinston 
Arnold O. Jones, Goldsboro 
Joseph E. Setzer, Jr., Goldsboro 

9 Claude W. Allen, Jr., Oxford 
Ben U. Allen, Jr., Henderson 
J. Larry Senter, Franklinton 
Charles W. Wilkinson, Oxford 

10 George F. Bason, Raleigh 
Stafford G. Bullock, Raleigh 
William A. Creech, Raleigh 
George R. Greene, Raleigh 
Joyce A. Hamilton, Raleigh 
Jerry W. Leonard, Raleigh 
Fred M. Morelock, Raleigh 
Louis W. Payne, Jr., Raleigh 
Russell G. Sherrill, III, Raleigh 



District 

1 1 Elton C. Pridgen, Smithfield 
William Christian, Sanford 
Edward H. McCormick, Lillington 
Owen H. Willis, Jr., Dunn 

12 Sol. G. Cherry, Fayetteville 
John S. Hair, Jr., Fayetteville 
Lacy S. Hair, Fayetteville 
Anna E. Keever, Fayetteville 
Warren L. Pate, Raeford 

Patricia Timmons-Goodson, Fayetteville 

13 William C. Gore, Jr., Whiteville 
Dewey J. Hooks, Jr., Whiteville 
Jerry A. Jolly, Tabor City 
David G. Wall, Elizabethtown 

14 David Q. LaBarre, Durham 
Richard Chaney, Durham 
Orlando F. Hudson, Jr., Durham 
Carolyn D. Johnson, Durham 
Kenneth C. Titus, Durham 

15A W. S. Harris, Jr., Graham 
Spencer B. Ennis, Burlington 
James K. Washburn, Burlington 

15B Stanley Peele, Chapel Hill 
Lowry M. Betts, Pittsboro 
Patricia S. Hunt, Chapel Hill 

16 John S. Gardner, Lumberton 
Adelaide G. Behan, Lumberton 
Charles G. McLean, Lumberton 
Herbert L. Richardson, Lumberton 

17A Peter M. McHugh, Reidsville 
Robert R. Blackwell, Reidsville 
Philip W. Allen, Yanceyville 

17B Jerry Cash Martin, Mount Airy 
Clarence W. Carter, King 

18 Paul T. Williams, Greensboro 
Sherry F. Alloway, Greensboro 
Robert E. Bencini, Jr., High Point 
William L. Daisy, Greensboro 
Edmund Lowe, High Point 
Lawrence C. McSwain, Greensboro 
J. Bruce Morton, Greensboro 
William A. Vaden, Greensboro 

19A Frank M. Montgomery, Salibury 
Robert M. Davis, Salisbury 
Adam C. Grant, Jr., Concord 
Clarence E. Horton, Jr., Kannapolis 



*The Chief District Court Judge for each district is listed first. 



33 



DISTRICT COURT JUDGES* 

(As of June 30, 1988) 



District 

19B William M. Neely, Asheboro 
Richard M. Toomes, Asheboro 

20 Donald R. Huffman, Wadesboro 
Michael E. Beale, Southern Pines 
Ronald W. Burris, Albemarle 
Kenneth W. Honneycutt, Monroe 
Tanya T. Wallace, Carthage 

21 Abner Alexander, Winston-Salem 
Lorretta C. Biggs, Clemmons 
James A. Harrill, Jr., Winston-Salem 
Roland H. Hayes, Winston-Salem 
Robert Kason Keiger, Winston-Salem 
William B. Reingold, Winston-Salem 

22 Lester P. Martin, Jr., Mocksville 
Samuel A. Cathey, Statesville 
George T. Fuller, Lexington 
Kimberly T.Harbinson, Taylorsville 
Robert W. Johnson, Statesville 

23 Samuel L. Osborne, Wilkesboro 
Edgar B. Gregory, Wilkesboro 
Michael E. Helms, Wilkesboro 

24 Robert H. Lacey, Newland 
Charles P. Ginn, Boone 

R. Alexander Lyerly, Banner Elk 

25 L. Oliver Noble, Jr., Hickory 
Ronald E. Bogle, Hickory 
Stewart L. Cloer, Hickory 
Jonathan L. Jones, Hickory 
Timothy S. Kincaid, Newton 

*The Chief District Court Judge for each district is listed first. 



District 

26 



27A 



27B 



James E. Lanning, Charlotte 
Marilyn R. Bissell, Charlotte 
L. Stanley Brown, Charlotte 
Daphene L. Cantrell, Charlotte 
Richard A. Elkins, Charlotte 
Shirley L. Fulton, Charlotte 
Resa L. Harris, Charlotte 
Robert P. Johnston, Charlotte 
William G. Jones, Charlotte 
Theodore P. Matus, II, Charlotte 
William H. Scarborough, Charlotte 

Lawrence B. Langson, Gastonia 
Berlin H. Carpenter, Jr., Gastonia 
Harley B. Gaston, Jr., Belmont 
Timothy L. Patti, Gastonia 
Catherine C. Stevens, Gastonia 

George W. Hamrick, Shelby 
James T. Bowen, Lincolnton 
John K. Fonvielle, Shelby 



28 Earl J. Fowler, Jr., Arden 
Gary S. Cash, Fletcher 
Robert L. Harrell, Asheville 
Peter L. Roda, Asheville 

29 Robert T. Gash, Brevard 
Loto J. Greenlee, Marion 

Zoro J. Guice, Jr., Hendersonville 
Thomas N. Hix, Hendersonville 

30 John J. Snow, Jr., Murphy 
Steven J. Bryant, Bryson City 
Danny E. Davis, Waynesville 



34 



DISTRICT COURT JUDGES* 



The Association of District Court Judges 

(Officers as of June 30, 1988) 

Sol G. Cherry, Fayetteville, President 

Frank M. Montgomery, Salisbury, Vice President 

Rodney R. Goodman, Kinston, Secretary-Treasurer 

George M. Britt, Tarboro 
Samuel A. Cathey, Statesville 
W.S. Harris, Jr., Graham 
Charles P. Ginn, Boone 

Additional Executive Committee Members 




Judge Sol. G. Cherry 



35 



ORGANIZATION AND OPERATIONS IN 1987-88 
The District Courts 



North Carolina's district courts are trial courts with 
original jurisdiction of the overwhelming majority of the 
cases handled by the State's court system. There were 151 
district court judges serving in 34 judicial districts during 
1987-88. These judges are elected to four-year terms by 
the voters of their respective districts. 

A total of 640 magistrate positions were authorized as 
of June 30, 1988. Of this number, about 100 positions 
were specified as part-time. Magistrates are appointed by 
the senior resident superior court judge from nominations 
submitted by the clerk of superior court of their county, 
and they are supervised by the chief district court judge of 
their district. 

Jurisdiction 

The jurisdiction of the district court extends to virtually 
all misdemeanor cases, probable cause hearings in most 
felony cases, all juvenile proceedings, involuntary com- 
mitments and recommitments to mental hospitals, and 
domestic relations cases. Effective September 1 , 1986, the 
General Assembly decriminalized many minor traffic 
offenses. Such offenses, previously charged as misdemea- 
nors, are now "infractions," defined as non-criminal vio- 
lations of law not punishable by imprisonment. The dis- 
trict court division has original jurisdiction for all infrac- 
tion cases. The district courts have concurrent jurisdiction 
with the superior courts in general civil cases, but the 
district courts are the proper courts for the trial of civil 
cases where the amount in controversy is $10,000 or less. 
Upon the plaintiff's request, a civil case in which the 
amount in controversy is $1,500 or less, may be desig- 
nated a "small claims" case and assigned by the chief 
district court judge to a magistrate for hearing. Magis- 
trates are empowered to try worthless check criminal 
cases when the value of the check does not exceed $500. In 
addition, they may accept written appearances, waivers of 
trial, and pleas of guilty in such worthless check cases 
when the amount of the check is $500 or less, the offender 
has made restitution, and the offender has fewer than four 
previous worthless check convictions. Magistrates may 
accept waviers of appearance and pleas of guilty in mis- 
demeanor or infraction cases involving traffic, alcohol, 
boating, hunting and fishing violation cases, for which a 
uniform schedule of fines has been adopted by the Con- 
ference of Chief District Judges. Magistrates also conduct 
initial hearings to fix conditions of release for arrested 
defendants, and they are empowered to issue arrest and 
search warrants. 

Administration 

A chief district judge is appointed for each judicial 
district by the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court from 



among the elected judges in the respective districts. Sub- 
ject to the Chief Justice's general supervision, each chief 
judge exercises administrative supervision and authority 
over the operation of the district courts and magistrates in 
his district. Each chief judge is responsible for scheduling 
sessions of district court and assigningjudges; supervising 
the calendaring of noncriminal cases; assigning matters to 
magistrates; making arrangements for court reporting 
and jury trials in civil cases; and supervising the discharge 
of clerical functions in the district courts. 

The chief district court judges meet in conference at 
least once a year upon the call of the Chief Justice of the 
Supreme Court. Among other matters, this annual con- 
ference adopts a uniform schedule of traffic offenses and 
fines for their violation for use by magistrates and clerks 
of court in accepting defendants' waivers of appearance 
and guilty pleas. 



Expenditures 

Total expenditures for the operation of the district 
courts in 1987-88 amounted to $29,939,853. This is an 
increase of 11.3% over 1986-87 expenditures of 
$26,908,723. Included in this total are the personnel costs 
of court reporters and secretaries as well as the personnel 
costs of the 151 district court judges and approximately 
640 magistrates. The 1 987-88 total is 1 8. 1 % of the General 
Fund expenditures for the operation of the entire Judicial 
Department, about the same percentage share of total 
Judicial Department expenditures that the district courts 
took for the 1986-87 fiscal year. 



Caseload 

During 1987-88 the statewide total number of district 
court filings (civil and criminal) increased 135,462 (7.2%) 
over the total number reported for 1986-87. Not including 
juvenile proceedings and mental hospital commitment 
hearings, the filing total in 1987-88 was 2,004,447. Much 
of this increase is attributable to increases in criminal 
motor vehicle and infraction filings. Considering criminal 
motor vehicle and infraction cases together there was an 
increase of 52,764 cases (5.4%) above the number of such 
cases filed in 1986-87. Filings of criminal non-motor vehi- 
cle cases increased by 46,579 (9.9%), and filings of civil 
magistrate cases increased by 29,881 (12.1%) above the 
numbers of cases filed in these categories in 1986-87. 

More detailed information on district court civil and 
criminal caseloads and on juvenile case activity is con- 
tained in Part IV of this Report. 



36 



ORGANIZATION AND OPERATIONS IN 1987-88 
The District Courts 



The Conference of Chief District Court Judges 

(Officers as of June 30, 1988) 

Robert H. Lacey, Newland, President 

Frank M. Montgomery, Salisbury, Vice President 

John S. Gardner, Lumberton, Secretary-Treasurer 







Judge Robert H. Lacey 



37 



ORGANIZATION AND OPERATIONS IN 1987-88 



DISTRICT ATTORNEYS 
(As of June 30, 1988) 



District 

1 H. P. WILLIAMS, JR., Elizabeth City 

2 MITCHELL D. NORTON, Washington 
3A THOMAS D. HAIGWOOD, Greenville 
3B WILLIAM D. McFADYEN, New Bern 

4 WILLIAM H. ANDREWS, Jacksonville 

5 JERRY L. SPIVEY, Wilmington 

6 DAVID H. BEARD, JR., Murfreesboro 

7 HOWARD S. BONEY, JR., Tarboro 

8 DONALD JACOBS, Goldsboro 

9 DAVID R. WATERS, Oxford 

10 C. COLON WILLOUGHBY, JR., Raleigh 

1 1 JOHN W. TWISDALE, Smithfield 

12 EDWARD W. GRANNIS, JR., Fayetteville 

13 MICHAEL F. EASLEY, Whiteville 

14 RONALD L. STEPHENS, Durham 
15A STEVE A. BALOG, Graham 

15B CARL R. FOX, Chapel Hill 

16 JOE FREEMAN BRITT, Lumberton 



District 

17A THURMAN B. HAMPTON, Wentworth 

17B HAROLD D. BOWMAN, Dobson 

18 HORACE M. KIMEL, JR., Greensboro 

19A JAMES E. ROBERTS, Concord 

19B GARLAND N. YATES, Asheboro 

20 CARROLL LOWDER, Monroe 

21 W. WARREN SPARROW, Winston-Salem 

22 H. W. ZIMMERMAN, JR., Lexington 

23 MICHAEL A. ASHBURN, North Wilkesboro 

24 JAMES THOMAS RUSHER, Marshall 

25 ROBERT E. THOMAS, Newton 

26 PETER S. GILCHRIST, Charlotte 
27A CALVIN B. HAMRICK, Gastonia 
27B WILLIAM C. YOUNG, Shelby 

28 ROBERT W. FISHER, Asheville 

29 ALAN C. LEONARD, Rutherfordton 

30 ROY H. PATTON, JR., Waynesville 



38 



ORGANIZATION AND OPERATIONS IN 1987-88 
The District Attorneys 



The Conference of District Attorneys 

(Executive Committee as of June 30, 1987) 

Michael F. Easley, Presdient 
Ronald L. Stephens, President- Elect 
H.P. Williams, Vice President 
Edward W. Grannis, Jr.. 
Thomas D. Haigwood 
Roy H. Patton, Jr. 
C. Colon Willoughby, Jr. 
H.W. Zimmerman, Jr. 



The District Attorneys Association 


(Officers as of June 30, 1987) 


Michael F. Easley, Bolivia, President 


H.P. Williams, Elizabeth City, Vice President 


Ronald L. Stephens, Durham, Vice President for 


Legislative Affairs 


Napoleon B. Barefoot, Jr., Bolivia, Secretary- 


Treasurer 




District Attorney 
Michael F. Easley 



39 



ORGANIZATION AND OPERATIONS IN 1987-88 



The District Attorneys 



The State is divided into 35 prosecutorial districts 
which, with one exception, correspond to the 34 judicial 
districts. By act of the 1981 Session of the General 
Assembly, the 3rd Judicial District is divided into two 
separate prosecutorial districts, Prosecutorial Districts 
3 A and 3B, effective October 1, 1981. Prosecutorial Dis- 
trict 3A consists of Pitt County, and Prosecutorial Dis- 
trict 3B is comprised of Craven, Carteret, and Pamlico 
(G.S. 7A-60). A district attorney is elected by the voters in 
each of the 35 districts for four-year terms. 

Duties 

The district attorney represents the State in all criminal 
actions brought in the superior and district courts in his 
district, and is responsible for ensuring that infraction 
cases are prosecuted efficiently. In addition to his prosec- 
utorial functions, the district attorney is responsible for 
calendaring criminal cases for trial. 

Resources 

Each district attorney may employ on a full-time basis 
the number of assistant district attorneys authorized by 
statute for his district. As of June 30, 1988, a total of 225 
assistant district attorneys were authorized for the 35 
prosecutorial districts. The district attorney of District 26 
(Mecklenburg County) had the largest staff (19 assistants) 
and the district attorney of seven judicial districts (15 A, 
15B, 17A, 17B, 19B, 23, 24) had the smallest staff (three 
assistants). 

Each district attorney is authorized to employ an 
administrative assistant to aid in preparing cases for trial 
and to expedite the criminal court docket. The district 
attorney in 18 of the 35 districts is authorized to employ 
an investigatorial assistant who aids in the investigation 
of cases prior to trial. All district attorneys are authorized 
to employ a victim and witness coordinator. 

Expenditures 

A total of $19,014,218 was expended in 1987-88 for the 
35 offices of district attorney. In addition, a total of 
$100,943 was expended for the District Attorney's Con- 
ference and its staff. 

1987-1988 Caseload 

A total of 88,948 criminal cases were filed in the super- 
ior courts during 1987-88, consisting of 55,284 felony 
cases and 33,664 misdemeanor appeals from the district 
courts. The total number of criminal filings in the super- 
ior courts in the previous year was 83,478. The increase of 
5,470 cases in 1987-88 represents a 6.6% increase over the 
1986-87 total. 

Total criminal cases disposed of by the superior courts 
in 1987-88 amounted to 85,123. There were 53,420 felony 



dispositions; the number of misdemeanor cases disposed 
of was 31,703. Compared with 1986-87, total criminal 
case dispositions increased by 3,987 over the 81,136 cases 
disposed of in that fiscal year. 

The median ages of 1987-88 criminal cases at disposi- 
tion in the superior courts were 86 days for felony cases 
and 70 days for misdemeaor appeals. In 1986-87, the 
median age of felony cases at disposition was 9 1 days, and 
the median age at disposition for misdemeanor appeals 
was 71 days. 

The number of criminal cases disposed of by jury trial 
in the superior courts increased slightly from 3,072 in 
1986-87 to 3,111 in 1987-88, an increase of 1.3%. As in 
past years, the proportion of total criminal cases disposed 
by jury was small — 3.8% in 1986-87 compared to 3.7% in 
1987-88. This small number of cases, however, requires 
the great proportion of superior court time and resources 
devoted to handling the criminal caseload. 

By contrast, in 1987-88 a majority (45,600 or 53.6%) of 
criminal case dispositions in superior courts were pro- 
cessed on submission of guilty pleas, not requiring a trial. 
This percentage represents a slight increase over the pro- 
portion of guilty plea dispositions reported for 1986-87 
(52.1%). 

"Dismissal by district attorney" accounted for a signifi- 
cant percentage of all criminal case dispotions during 
1987-88— a total of 23,657 cases, or 27.8% of all disposi- 
tions. This proportion is comparable to that recorded for 
prior years. Many of the dismissals involved the situa- 
tions of two or more cases pending against the same 
defendant, resulting in a plea bargain agreement where 
the defendant pleads guilty to some charges in exchange 
for a dismissal of others. 

There was an increase in the number of "Speedy Trial 
Act" dismissals in superior courts, from 48 in 1986-87 to 
52 in 1987-88. 

The total number of criminal cases disposed of in the 
superior courts was 3,825 cases less than the total number 
of case filed in 1987-88. Consequently, the number of 
criminal cases pending in suprioer court increased from 
27,229 at the beginning of the fiscal year to a total at year's 
end of 31,054, an increase of 14.0%. 

The median age of pending felony cases in the superior 
courts decreased from 88 days on June 30, 1987 to 79 days 
on June 30, 1988. The median age of pending misdemea- 
nor appeals also decreased — from 83 days on June 30, 
1987 to 78 days on June 30, 1988. 

Consideration of district court criminal caseloads is 
affected by the existence of a new case category in the 
district courts, "infractions. "Effective September 1, 1986, 
many minor traffic offenses were decriminalized and 
thereafter charged as infractions, defined as non-criminal 
violations of law not punishable by imprisonment. 
Although non-criminal, district attorneys are responsible 
for the prosecution of these cases. 

Nearly all infraction cases were criminal motor vehicle 
cases in prior years. Therefore, for purposes of comparing 



40 



ORGANIZATION AND OPERATIONS IN 1987-88 



current to prior year criminal caseloads, motor vehicle 
filings and dispositions in prior years are compared to 
filings and dispositions of motor vehicle cases plus infrac- 
tions in 1987-88. 

In the district courts, a total of 1 ,542,962 criminal cases 
and infractions were filed during 1987-88. This total con- 
sisted of 419,407 criminal motor vehicle cases, 608,845 
infraction cases, and 514,710 criminal non-motor vehicle 
cases. A comparison of total filings in 1987-88 with total 
filings in 1986-87 (1,443,619) reveals an increase in district 
court criminal and infraction filings of 99,343 cases, or 
6.9%. Filings of non-motor vehicle cases rose by 46,579 
cases (9.9%), from 468,131 cases in 1986-87 to 514,710 
cases in 1987-88. Filings of motor vehicle plus infraction 
cases increased by 52,764 cases (5.4%), from 975,488 in 
1986-87 to 1,028,252 in 1987-88. 

Total dispositions of motor vehicle and infraction cases 
in the district courts amounted to 994,387 cases during 
1987-88 (401,855 motor vehicle dispositions and 592,532 
infraction dispositions). As in prior years, a substantial 
portion of such cases are disposed by waiver of appear- 
ance and entry of pleas of guilty (or "responsibility" in 
infraction cases) before a clerk or magistrate. During 
1987-88, 506,999 (5 1 .0%) of motor vehicle and infraction 
cases were disposed by waiver. This substantial number of 
cases did not, of course, require action by the district 
attorneys' offices and should not be regarded as having 
been a part of the district attorneys' caseload. The remain- 
ing 487,388 infraction and motor vehicle cases (186,022 
infraction and 301 ,332 motor vehicle cases) were disposed 
by means other than waiver. This balance was 59,022 
cases (or 13.8%) more than the 428,366 non-waiver motor 



vehicle dispositions in 1986-87. (The clerks of court do 
not report motor vehicle criminal cases or infractions by 
case file number to the Administrative Office of the 
Courts. Only summary total number of filings and dispo- 
sitions are reported. Therefore, it is not possible by 
computer-processing to obtain pending case data for the 
motor vehicle criminal case or infraction case categories.) 

With respect to non-motor vehicle criminal case dispo- 
sitions, a total of 500,529 such cases were disposed of in 
district courts in 1987-88. As with superior court criminal 
cases, the most frequent method of disposition was by 
entry of guilty plea; the next most frequent was dismissal 
by the district attorney. Some 177,010 cases, or 35.4% of 
the dispositions were by guilty pleas. An additional 
138,798 cases, or 27.7% of the total were disposed of by 
prosecutor dismissal. The remaining cases were disposed 
of by waiver (11.3%), trial (8.2%), as a felony probable 
cause matter (9.1%), or by other means (8.3%). 

During 1987-88, the median age at disposition of non- 
motor vehicle criminal cases was 30 days, compared with 
28 days at disposition for 1986-87. 

Total non-motor vehicle criminal dispositions were 
14,181 cases less than the total of such filings during 
1 987-88. The number of non-motor vehicle criminal cases 
pending at year's end was 97,866, compared with a total of 
83,685 at the beginning of the year, an increase of 1 4, 1 8 1 
(16.9%) in the number of pending cases. The median age 
for pending non-motor vehicle cases rose from 54 days on 
June 30, 1987 to 57 days on June 30, 1988. 

Additional information on the criminal caseloads in 
superior and district courts is included in Part IV of this 
Report. 



41 



CLERKS OF SUPERIOR COURT 

(As of June 30, 1988) 



COUNTY 


CLERK OF COURT 


COUNTY 


Alamance 


Louise B. Wilson 


Johnston 


Alexander 


Seth Chapman 


Jones 


Alleghany 


Rebecca J. Gambill 


Lee 


Anson 


R. Frank Hightower 


Lenoir 


Ashe 


Jerry L. Roten 


Lincoln 


Avery 


Robert F. Taylor 


Macon 


Beaufort 


Thomas S. Payne, III 


Madison 


Bertie 


John Tyler 


Martin 


Bladen 


Hilda H. Coleman 


McDowell 


Brunswick 


Diana R. Morgan 


Mecklenburg 


Buncombe 


J. Ray Elingburg 


Mitchell 


Burke 


Major A. Joines 


Montgomery 


Cabarrus 


Estus B. White 


Moore 


Caldwell 


Jeanette Turner 


Nash 


Camden 


Catherine W. McCoy 


New Hanover 


Carteret 


Darlene Leonard 


Northampton 


Caswell 


Janet H. Cobb 


Onslow 


Catawba 


Phyllis B. Hicks 


Orange 


Chatham 


Janice Oldham 


Pamlico 


Cherokee 


Rose Mary Crooke 


Pasquotank 


Chowan 


Marjorie H. Hollowell 


Pender 


Clay 


James H. McClure 


Perquimans 


Cleveland 


Ruth S. Dedmon 


Person 


Columbus 


Lacy R. Thompson 


Pitt 


Craven 


Dorothy Pate 


Polk 


Cumberland 


George T. Griffin 


Randolph 


Currituck 


Sheila R. Doxey 


Richmond 


Dare 


Betty Mann 


Robeson 


Davidson 


Martha S. Nicholson 


Rockingham 


Davie 


Delores C. Jordan 


Rowan 


Duplin 


John A. Johnson 


Rutherford 


Durham 


James Leo Carr 


Sampson 


Edgecombe 


Curtis Weaver 


Scotland 


Forsyth 


Frances P. Storey 


Stanly 


Franklin 


Ralph S. Knott 


Stokes 


Gaston 


Betty B. Jenkins 


Surry 


Gates 


Terry L. Riddick 


Swain 


Graham 


O.W. Hooper, Jr. 


Transylvania 


Granville 


Mary Ruth C. Nelms 


Tyrrell 


Greene 


Joyce L. Harrell 


Union 


Guilford 


Barbara G. Washington 


Vance 


Halifax 


Ellen C. Neathery 


Wake 


Harnett 


Georgia Lee Brown 


Warren 


Haywood 


William G. Henry 


Washington 


Henderson 


Thomas H. Thompson 


Watauga 


Hertford 


Richard T. Vann 


Wayne 


Hoke 


Juanita Edmund 


Wilkes 


Hyde 


Lenora R. Bright 


Wilson 


Iredell 


Angelia T. Roberts 


Yadkin 


Jackson 


Frank Watson, Jr. 


Yancey 



CLERK OF COURT 

Will R. Crocker 
Ronald H. Metts 
Lucille H. York 
Claude C. Davis 
Pamela C. Huskey 
Anna I. Carson 
James W. Cody 
Phyllis G. Pearson 
Ruth B. Williams 
Robert M. Blackburn 
Linda D. Woody 
Charles M. Johnson 
Rachel H. Comer 
Rachel M. Joyner 
Louise D. Rehder 
R. Jennings White, Jr. 
Everitte Barbee 
Shirley L. James 
Mary Jo Potter 
Frances W. Thompson 
Frances D. Basden 
Walter W. White 
W. Thomas Humphries 
Sandra Gaskins 
Judy P. Arledge 
Lynda B. Skeen 
Catherine S. Wilson 
Dixie I. Barrington 
Frankie C. Williams 
Francis Glover 
Keith H. Melton 
Charlie T. McCullen 
C. Whitfield Gibson, Jr. 
David R. Fisher 
Pauline Kirkman 
David J. Beal 
Sara Robinson 
Marian M. McMahon 
Nathan T. Everett 
Nola H. McCollum 
Lucy Longmire 
John M. Kennedy 
Richard E. Hunter, Jr. 
Timothy L. Spear 
John T. Bingham 
David B. Brantly 
Wayne Roope 
Nora H. Hargrove 
Harold J. Long 
F. Warren Hughes 



42 



ORGANIZATION AND OPERATIONS IN 1987-88 
The Clerks of Superior Court 



Association of Clerks of Superior Court 

(Officers as of June 30, 1988) 

Frances W. Thompson, Pasquotank County, 
President 

James L. Carr, Durham County 
First Vice President 

Ray Elingburg, Buncombe County 
Second Vice President 

Judy Arledge, Polk County 
Secretary 

C. Whitfield Gibson, Jr., Scotland County 
Treasurer 




Frances W. Thompson 



43 



ORGANIZATION AND OPERATIONS IN 1987-88 



The Clerks of Superior Court 



A Clerk of Superior Court is elected for a four-year 
term by the voters in each of North Carolina's 100 coun- 
ties. The Clerk has jurisdiction to hear and decide special 
proceedings and is, ex officio, judge of probate, in addi- 
tion to performing record-keeping and administrative 
functions for both the superior and district courts of his 
county. 

Jurisdiction 

The original jurisdiction of the clerk of superior court 
includes the probate of wills and administration of dece- 
dents' estates. It also includes such "special proceedings" 
as adoptions, condemnations of private property under 
the public's right of eminent domain, proceedings to 
establish boundaries, foreclosures, and certain proceed- 
ings to administer the estates of minors and incompetent 
adults. The right of appeal from the clerks' judgments in 
such cases lies to the superior court. 

The clerk of superior court is also empowered to issue 
search warrants and arrest warrants, subpoenas, and 
other process necessary to execute the judgments entered 
in the superior and district courts of his county. For 
certain misdemeanor criminal offenses, the clerk is autho- 
rized to accept defendants' waiver of appearance and plea 
of guilty and to impose a fine in accordance with a sche- 
dule established by the Conference of Chief District 
Court Judges. 

Administration 

The clerk of superior court performs administrative 
duties for both the superior and district courts of his 
county. Among these duties are the maintenance of court 
records and indexes, the control and accounting of funds, 
and the furnishing of information to the Administrative 
Office of the Courts. 

In most counties, the clerk continues to perform certain 
functions related to preparation of civil case calendars, 
and in many counties, the clerk's staff assists the district 
attorney in preparing criminal case calendars as well. 



Policy and oversight responsibility for civil case calendar- 
ing is vested in the State's senior resident superior court 
judges and chief district court judges. However, day-to- 
day civil calendar preparation is the clerk's responsibility 
in all districts except those served by trial court ad- 
ministrators. 

Expenditures 

A total of $50,954,569 was expended in 1987-88 for the 
operation of the 100 clerk of superior court offices. In 
addition to the salaries and other expenses of the clerks 
and their staffs, this total includes expenditures for jurors' 
fees, and witness expenses. 

Total expenditures for clerks' offices in 1987-88 
amounted to 30.8% of the General Fund expenditures for 
the operations of the entire Judicial Department. 

1987-88 Caseload 

During 1987-88, estate case filings totalled 45,013 
which represents a 4.0% increase over the 43,285 case filed 
in 1986-87. Estate case dispositions totalled 43,288 cases 
in 19876-88, or 2.9% more than the previous year's total of 
42,070. 

A total of 41,881 special proceedings was filed before 
the 100 clerks of superior courts in 1987-88. This is an 
increase of 2,595 cases (6.6%) from the 39,286 filings in 
the previous fiscal years. Special proceedings dispositions 
totalled 37,951 cases, or 17.5% more than the previous 
year's total of 32,309. 

The clerks of superior court are also responsible for 
handling the records of all case filings and dispositions in 
the superior and district courts. The total number of 
superior court case filings during the 1987-88 year was 
105,704 and the total number of district court filings, not 
including juvenile proceedings and mental hospital com- 
mitment hearings, was 2,004,447. 

More detailed information on the estates and special 
proceedings caseloads is included in Part IV of this 
Report. 



44 



ORGANIZATION AND OPERATIONS IN 1987-88 



Juvenile Services Division 



The Juvenile Services Division of the Administrative 
Office of the Courts provides intake, probation and after- 
care services to juveniles who are before the District 
Courts for delinquent matters, i.e., violations of the crimi- 
nal code, including motor vehicle violations; and for 
undisciplined matters, such as running away from home, 
being truant, and being beyond the parents' disciplinary 
control. 

Intake is the screening of complaints alleging delin- 
quent or undisciplined behavior by children, to determine 
whether petitions should be filed. During the 1987-88 year 
a total of 28,906 complaints were brought to the attention 
of intake counselors. Of this number, 19,002 (66%) were 
approved for filing, and 9,904 (34%) were not approved 
for filing. 

Probation and aftercare refer to supervision of children 
in their own communities. Probation is authorized by 
judicial order. Aftercare service is provided for juveniles 
after their release from a training school. (Protective 
supervision is also a form of court-ordered supervision 
within the community; and this service is combined with 
probation and aftercare.) 

In 1987-88 a total of 17,086 juveniles were supervised in 
the probation and aftercare program. 



Expenditures 

The Juvenile Services Division is State-funded. The 
expenditures for fiscal year 1987-88 totalled $1 1,334,027. 
This was an increase of 7.8% over the 1986-87 expendi- 
tures. The 1987-88 expenditures amounted to 6.8% of all 
General Fund expenditures for the operation of the entire 
Judicial Department, close to the same percentage share 
of total Judicial Department expenditures for the Di- 
vision as in the previous fiscal year. 

Administration 

The Administrator of the Juvenile Services Division is 
appointed by the Director of the Administrative Office of 
the Courts. A chief court counselor is appointed for each 
judicial district by the Administrator of the Juvenile Ser- 
vices Division, with the approval of the Chief District 
Court Judge and the Administrative Officer of the 
Courts. Subject to the Administrator's general supervi- 
sion, each chief court counselor exercises administrative 
supervision over the operation of the court counseling 
services in the respective districts. 



Juvenile Services Division Staff 
(As of June 30, 1988) 

Thomas A. Danek, Administrator 

Nancy C. Patteson, Area Administrator 

Edward F. Taylor, Area Administrator 

John T. Wilson, Area Administrator 

Rex B. Yates, Area Administrator 

M. Harold Rogerson, Jr., Program Specialist 

Arlene J. Kincaid, Administrative Officer 



45 



ORGANIZATION AND OPERATIONS IN 1987-88 



Juvenile Service Division 
(As of June 30, 1988) 



Judicial 




District 


Chief Court Counselors 


1 


Donald Alexander 


2 


Joseph A. Paul 


3 


Eve C. Rogers 


4 


Ida Ray Miles 


5 


Phyllis Roebuck 


6 


John R. Brady 


7 


Pam Honeycutt 


8 


Lynn C. Sasser 


9 


Cecil T. Lewis, Jr. 


10 


Larry C. Dix 


1! 


Henry C. Cox 


12 


Phil T. Utley 


13 


Jimmy E. Godwin 


14 


Fred Elkins 


15A 


Harry L. Derr 


15B 


Donald Hargrove 



Judicial 




District 


Chief Court Counselors 


\b 


Robert H. Hughes 


17Aand 17B 


Martha M. Lauten 


18 


J. Manley Dodson 


19A and 19B 


James C. Queen 


20 


Jimmy L. Craig 


21 


James J. Weakland 


22 


Carl T. Duncan 


23 


C. Wayne Dixon 


24 


Lynn Hughes 


25 


Lee Cox 


26 


James A. Yancey 


27A 


Charles Reeves 


27B 


Gloria Newman 


28 


Louis Parrish 


29 


Kenneth E. Lanninj 


30 


Betty G. Alley 



THE COURT COUNSELORS ASSOCIATION 
(Officers for 1987-88) 

Executive Committee Members 

Carey Collins President 
Carl Duncan, President- Elect 
Pat Wolfe, Seretary 
Dennis Cotten, Treasurer 
Amie Haith, Parliamentarian 



1985-88 

Jane Clare 
Bruce Stanback 



Board Members 

1986-89 1987-90 

Richard Alligood Gloria Newman 

Marion Brewer Blake Belcher 

Anne Loy Charles Reeves 




Carey Collins 



46 



ORGANIZATION AND OPERATIONS IN 1987-88 
Office of Guardian Ad Litem Services 



Program Services 

When a peition alleging abuse or neglect of a juvenile is 
filed in district court, the judge appoints a trained volun- 
teer guardian ad litem and an attorney advocate to work 
together to represent the child's best interests. The attor- 
ney protects the child's legal rights while ensuring that the 
volunteer guardian has appropriate access to the court 
process. The trained volunteer investigates the child's 
situation and works with the attorney to report the child's 
needs to the court and to make recommendations for case 
disposition and any necessary continuing supervision 
until court intervention is no longer required. During 
1 987-88, a total of 989 volunteers were active in the North 
Carolina program and represented a total of 5,0 1 1 abused 
and neglected children. These volunteers participated in 
5,434 court hearings and gave approximately 75,000 
volunteer hours to casework and training in the State's 
guardian ad litem program. 

Expenditures 

During 1 987-88, total expenditures for the guardian ad 
litem program amounted to $1,332,851. Of this amount, 
$5 14,257 was for program attorney fees and $8 1 8,594 was 
for program administration. The total included reimbur- 
sement of volunteers' expense of $41,158 (covering 64,752 
casework hours for 5,0 1 1 abused and neglected children). 
This compares with 1986-87 total expenditure of 
$1,1 17,720, with 755 volunteers representing, 3,837 child- 
ren and providing 37,444 casework hours with reimbur- 
sement expenses of $28,778. 

Administration 

The Office of Guardian Ad Litem Services, established 
by the General Assembly in 1983, is a division of the 
Administrative Office of the Courts. The Director of the 
Administrative Offie of the Courts appoints the Adminis- 
trator of the Office of Guardian Ad Litem Service and 



appoints members of a Guardian Ad Litem Advisory 
Committee to work with the Administrator, who is 
responsible for planning and directing the guardian ad 
litem services program through the State. 

The Administrator is assisted by two regional manag- 
ers, each of whom supervises the development and 
implementation of services for a segment of judicial dis- 
tricts, directing the local program, providing assistance in 
training programs for volunteers, and resolving opera- 
tional problems in the districts. 

A coordinator is employed for 30 of the State's 34 
judicial districts to recruit, screen, train and supervise 
volunteers. Seven of these coordinators were added in 
fiscal year 1987-88. Program coordinators contact com- 
munity groups, local agencies, the courts, and the media 
in order to develop volunteer participation, solicit sup- 
port from key officials, provide public education about 
the program, and cultivate services for children. The 
coordinators plan an initial sixteen-hour training course 
for new veolunteers, match children (who are before the 
courts) with volunteers, implement continued training for 
experienced guardians, and provide supervision of, and 
consultation and support to, volunteers. Other coordina- 
tor responsibilities are to assure that in each case the 
attorney receives information from the volunteer assigned 
to the case and that the court receives timely oral or 
written reports each time a child's case is heard. (Coordi- 
nators were not employed during 1987-88 for four judicial 
districts in which the case load was too small to justify a 
coordinator position. In those counties, the contract 
attorney served as the volunteer coordinator.) 

Guardian Ad Litem Staff 
(As of June 30, 1988) 

Virginia C. Weisz, Administrator 

Cindy Mays, Regional Manager 

Marilyn Stevens, Regional Manager 



47 



ORGANIZATION AND OPERATIONS IN 1987-88 

Guardian ad Litem Division 
(As of June 30, 1988) 



Judicial 




Judicial 




District 


Coordinator 


District 


Coordinator 


1 


Veola Spivey 


15A 


Eleanor Ketcham 


2 


Jennifer Leggett 


15B& 19B 


Floyd Wicker 


3 


Carol Mattocks 


16 


Gladys Pierce 


4 


Jean Hawley 


18 


Sam Parrish 


5 


Jane Brister 


19A 


Amy Collins 


6 


Patsey Moseley-Moss 


20 


Martha Sue Hall 


7 


Sandra Pittman 


21 


Linda Garrou 


8 


Claudia Kadis 


22 


Pam Ashmore 


9 


Sarah Sponenberg 


25 


Anglea Phillips 


10 


Lloyd Inman 


26 


Judi Strause 


12 


Brownie Smathers 


27A&B 


Sindy Waggoner 


13 


Pam Ward & 


28 


Jean Moore 




Betty Buck 


29 


Barbara King 


14 


Cy Gurney Elkins 


30 


Celia Larson 



48 



ORGANIZATION AND OPERATIONS IN 1987-88 
Public Defenders 



During 1987-88, there were seven public defender offi- 
ces in North Carolina, serving Judicial Districts 3,* 12, 
15B, 18, 26, 27 A, and 28. The public defender for each 
district is appointed by the senior resident superior court 
judge of that district from a list of not less than two and 
not more than three names nominated by written ballot of 
the attorneys resident in the district who are licensed to 
practice law in North Carolina. Their terms are four 
years. Each public defender is by statute provided a min- 
imum of one full-time assistant public defender and addi- 
tional full-time or part-time assistants as may be autho- 
rized by the Administrative Office of the Courts. 

Entitlement of Indigents to Counsel 

A person is determined to be indigent if he is found 
"financially unable to secure legal representation." He is 
entitled to State-paid legal representation in: any pro- 
ceeding which may result in (or which seeks relief from) 
confinement; a fine of $500 or more; or extradition to 
another State; a proceeding alleging mental illness or 
incapacity which may result in hospitalization, steriliza- 
tion, or the loss of certain property rights; and juvenile 
proceedings which may result in confinement, transfer to 
superior court for a felony trial, or termination of paren- 
tal rights. 

Most of the cases of State-paid representation of indi- 
gents in the districts with public defenders are handled by 
the public defender's office. However, the court may in 
certain circumstances — such as existence of a potential 
conflict of interest — assign private counsel to represent an 
indigent defendant. In the other 28 districts, the assigned 
private counsel system was the only one used. 

Expenditures 

A total of $4,087,252 was expended for the operation of 
the seven public defenders' offices during 1987-88. This 



was an increase of $467,041 (12.9%) over the 1986-87 total 
of $3,620,211. 

1987-88 Caseload 

The seven public defender offices disposed of cases 
involving a total of 24,956 defendents during 1987-88. 
This was an increase of 1,669 defendants, or 7.2%, over 
the 23,287 defendants represented during 1986-87. 

Additional information concerning the operation of 
these offices is found in Part III of this Annual Report. 



PUBLIC DEFENDERS 
(As of June 30, 1988) 

* District 3 

Robert L. Shoffner, Greenville 

District 12 
Mary Ann Tally, Fayetteville 

District 15B 
John Kirk Osborn, Chapel Hill 

District 18 
Wallace G. Harrelson, Greensboro 

District 26 
Isabel S. Day, Charlotte 

District 27A 
Rowell C. Cloninger, Jr., Gastonia 

District 28 
J. Robert Hufstader, Asheville 



♦The public defender serves only two counties of the four in District 3: 
Pitt and Carteret. 



49 



ORGANIZATION AND OPERATIONS IN 1987-88 
Public Defenders 



The Association of Public Defenders 

(Officers as of June 30, 1988) 

Marc D. Towler, President 
James Williams, Vice President 
Frederick Lind, Secretary-Treasurer 





Marc D. Towler 



50 



ORGANIZATION AND OPERATIONS IN 1987-88 

The Office of the Appellate Defender 

(Staff as of June 30, 1988) 



Malcolm Ray Hunter, Jr., Appellate Defender 
Assistant Appellate Defenders 



Louis D. Bilionis 
David W. Dorey 
Staples S. Hughes 
Teresa McHugh 



Mark D. Montgomery 

Daniel R. Pollitt 

M. Gordon Widenhouse 



The Appellate Defender Office began operation as a 
State-funded program on October 1 , 1981. (Prior to that 
date, appellate defender services were funded by a one- 
year federal grant.) The 1985 General Assembly made 
permanent The Appellate Defender Office by repealing 
its expiration provision. In accord with the assignments 
made by trial court judges, it is the responsibility of the 
Appellate Defender and his staff to provide criminal 
defense appellate services to indigent persons who are 
appealing their convictions to the N. C. Supreme Court, 
the N. C. Court of Appeals, or to Federal courts. 

The Appellate Defender is appointed by, and carries 
out his duties under the general supervision of the Chief 
Justice. The Chief Justice may, consistent with the 
resources available to the Appellate Defender and to 
insure quality criminal defense services, authorize certain 
appeals to be assigned to a local public defender office or 
to private assigned counsel instead of to the Appellate 
Defender. 



1987-88 Caseload 

As of July 1, 1987, the Appellate Defender had 82 cases 
pending in the Supreme Court of North Carolina. During 
the 1987-88 year, a total of 52 additional appeals to the 
Supreme Court were assigned to the Appellate Defender's 
Office, and during that year a total of 51 cases were 
disposed of. This left 83 cases pending as of June 30, 1988. 
During the 1987-88 year, the Appellate Defender and his 
staff filed a total of 48 briefs in the Supreme Court. 

As of July 1, 1987, the Appellate Defender had 113 
cases pending in the North Carolina Court of Appeals. 
During the 1987-88 year, a total of 79 additional appeals 
to the Court of Appeals were assigned to the Appellate 
Defender's Office, and during that year, a total of 1 1 1 
cases were disposed of. This left 81 cases pending as of 
June 30, 1988. The Appellate Defender and his staff filed 
a total of 68 briefs in the Court of Appeals during the 
1987-88 year. 



51 



ORGANIZATION AND OPERATIONS IN 1987-88 



The North Carolina Courts Commission 



(Members as of June 30, 1988) 



Appointed by the Governor 

Jonathan L. Rhyne, Jr., Lincolnton, Chairman 
Member, N.C. House of Representatives 

Clyde M. Roberts, Marshall 

Garland N. Yates, Asheboro 
District Attorney 

Warren Owen, Charlotte 

Harold J. Long, Yadkinville 
Clerk of Court 

Dan R. Simpson, Morganton 
Member, N. C. State Senate 

Appointed by President of the Senate 
(Lieutenant Governor) 

Anthony E. Rand, Fayetteville 
Member, N.C. Senate 

Russell J. Hollers Troy 

Henson P. Barnes, Goldsboro 
Member, N.C. Senate 

Alfred M. Goodwin, Louisburg 

R.C. Soles, Jr., Tabor City 
Member, N. C. Senate 

Lillian O. Briant, Asheboro 

Ex-Officio (Non-Voting) 

O. William Faison, Raleigh 
N.C. Bar Association Representative 

Z. Creighton Brinson, Tarboro 
N.C. State Bar Representative 

Franklin E. Freeman, Jr., Raleigh 
Administrative Officer of the Courts 



Appointed by the Speaker of the House of 
Representatives 

Daniel T. Blue, Jr., Raleigh 

Member, N.C. House of Representatives 

Robert C. Hunter, Marion 
Member, N.C. House of Representatives 

Ralph S. Knott, Louisburg 
Clerk of Court 

Roy A. Cooper, III, Rocky Mount 

Member, N.C. House of Representatives 

Robert C. Hunter, Marion 
Member, N.C. House of Representatives 

Dennis A. Wicker, Sanford 
Member, N.C. House of Representatives 

Appointed by the Chief Justice of the 
N.C. Supreme Court 

Burley B. Mitchell, Jr., Raleigh 
Associate Justice, N.C. Supreme Court 

Clifton E. Johnson, Charlotte 
Judge, N.C. Court of Appeals 

J. Milton Reed, Jr., Durham 
Superior Court Judge 

Forrest A. Ferrell, Hickory 
Superior Court Judge 

Nicholas Long, Roanoke Rapids 
District Court Judge 

Samuel McD. Tate, Morganton 
District Court Judge 



52 



ORGANIZATION AND OPERATIONS IN 1987-88 
The North Carolina Courts Commission 



The North Carolina Courts Commission was reestab- 
lished by the 1 979 General Assembly "to make continuing 
studies of the structure, organization, jurisdiction, proce- 
dures and personnel of the Judicial Department and of 
the General Court of Justice and to make recommenda- 
tions to the General Assembly for such changes therein as 
will facilitate the administration of justice". Initially, the 
Commission was comprised of 15 voting members, with 
five each appointed by the Governor, the President of the 
Senate (Lieutenant Governor), and the Speaker of the 
House. The Commission also had three ex officio mem- 
bers as shown above. 

The 1981 General Assembly amended the statutes per- 
taining to the Courts Commission, to increase the number 
of voting members from 15 to 23, with the Governor to 
appoint seven voting members, the President of the 
Senate to appoint eight voting members, and the Speaker 
of the House to appoint eight voting members. The non- 
voting ex officio members remained the same: a represen- 
tative of the North Carolina Bar Association, a represen- 
tative of the North Carolina State Bar, and the Adminis- 
trative Officer of the Courts. 

The 1983 Session of the General Assembly further 
amended G.S. 7A-506, to revise the voting membership of 
the Commission. Effective July 1, 1983, the Commission 
consists of 24 voting members, six to be appointed by the 
Governor; six to be appointed by the Speaker of the 
House; six to be appointed by the President of the Senate; 
and six to be appointed by the Chief Justice of the North 
Carolina Supreme Court. The Governor continues to 
appoint the Chairman of the Commission, from among 
its legislative members. The non-voting ex officio mem- 
bership of three persons remains the same. 

Of the six appointees of the Chief Justice, one is to be a 
Justice of the Supreme Court, one is to be a Judge of the 
Court of Appeals, two are to be judges of superior court, 
and two are to be judges of district court. 

Of the six appointees of the Governor, one is to be a 
district attorney, one a practicing attorney, one a clerk of 



superior court, and three are to be members or former 
members of the General Assembly and at least one of 
these shall not be an attorney. 

Of the six appointees of the Speaker of the House, at 
least three are to be practicing attorneys, and three are to 
be members or formers members of the General Assem- 
bly, and at least one of these three is not to be an attorney. 

Of the six appointees of the President of the Senate, at 
least three are to be practicing attorneys, three are to be 
members or former members of the General Assembly, 
and at least one is to be a magistrate. 

During the 1987-88 year the Courts Commission had a 
total of five meetings: October 30, 1987; February 26, 
March 25, April 22, and May 6, 1988. All meetings were 
held in Raleigh. Topics considered during the year were: 

(1) alternative resolution programs, including media- 
tion, arbitration, and summary jury trials; (2) securing 
competent legal counsel for all indigent defendants in 
criminal cases and providing adequate compensation for 
counsel for indigents; (3) the infractions law: (4) proposed 
legislation to delete obsoltet language from the statutes 
on cross-indexing of judgments and lis pendens: (5) pro- 
posed legislation to clarify magistrates' guilty plea juris- 
diction; (6) proposed legislation to secure reimbursement 
of expenses of counsel for indigent defendants. 

The Commission unanimously voted to endorse the 
proposed legislation relating to cross-indexing of judg- 
ments and lis pendens and relating to magistrates 1 guilty 
plea jurisdiction, for consideration at the 1988 short legis- 
lative session (if the proposals could, under regular legis- 
lative rules, be taken up at the 1988 session). In addition, 
at its May 6, 1988 meeting the Commission approved two 
resolutions to be submitted to Legislative officials at the 
1988 Session. One resolution endorsed and recommended 
adequate funding of the indigent defense fund and the 
other resolution recommended expansion of the indigent 
screening program. 



53 



ORGANIZATION AND OPERATIONS IN 1987-88 

The Judicial Standards Commission 

(Members as of June 30, 1988) 



Appointed by the Chief Justice 

Court of Appeals Judge Gerald Arnold, 
Fuquay-Varina, Chairman 

Superior Court Judge James M. Long, 
Pilot Mountain 

District Court Judge W. S. Harris, Jr., Graham 



Appointed by the Governor 

Pamela S. Gaither, Charlotte, Secretary 
Albert E. Partridge, Jr., Concord 



Elected by the Council of the N.C. State Bar 

Rivers D. Johnson, Jr., Warsaw, Vice Chairman 
Louis J. Fisher, Jr., High Point 



Deborah R. Carrington, Executive Secretary 




Judge Gerald Arnold 



54 



ORGANIZATION AND OPERATIONS IN 1987-88 

THE JUDICIAL STANDARDS COMMISSION 

July 1, 1987 — June 30, 1988 



The Judicial Standards Commission was established 
by the General Assembly pursuant to a constitutional 
amendment approved by the voters at the general election 
in November 1972. 

Upon recommendation of the Commission, the Su- 
preme Court may censure or remove any judge for willful 
misconduct in office, willful and persistent failure to per- 
form his duties, habitual intemperance, conviction of a 
crime involving moral turpitude, or conduct prejudicial 
to the administration of justice that brings the judicial 
office into disrepute. In addition, upon recommendation 
of the Commission, the Supreme Court may remove any 
judge for mental or physical incapacity interfering with 
the performance of his duties, which is, or is likely to 
become, permanent. 

Where a recommendation for censure or removal 
involves ajustice of the Supreme Court, the recommenda- 
tion and supporting record is filed with the Court of 
Appeals which has and proceeds under the same author- 
ity for censure or removal of a judge. Such a proceeding 
would be heard by the Chief Judge of the Court of 
Appeals and the six judges senior in service, excluding the 
Court of Appeals judge who by law serves as the Chair- 
man of the Judicial Standards Commission. 

In addition to a recommendation of censure or remov- 
al, the Commission also utilizes a disciplinary measure 
known as a reprimand. The reprimand is a mechanism 
administratively developed for dealing with inquiries 
where the conduct does not warrant censure or removal, 
but where some action is justified. Since the establishment 
of the Judicial Standards Commission in 1973, repri- 
mands have been issued in fifteen instances covering 21 
inquiries. 

During the July 1, 1987 - Jjne 30, 1988 fiscal year, the 
Judicial Standards Commission met on July 10, October 
16, December 18, March 25, and June 10. 



A complaint or other information against a judge, 
whether filed with the Commission or initiated by the 
Commission on its own motion, is designated as an 
"Inquiry Concerning a Judge. "Thirty such inquiries were 
pending as of July 1, 1987, and 98 inquiries were filed 
during the fiscal year, giving the Commission a total 
workload of 128 inquiries. 

During the fiscal year, the Commission disposed of 1 1 3 
inquiries, and 1 5 inquiries remained pending at the end of 
the fiscal year. 

The determinations of the Commission regarding the 
113 inquiries disposed of during the fiscal year were as 
follows: 

( 1 ) 93 inquiries were determined to involve evidentiary 
rulings, length of sentences, or other matters not 
within the Commission's jurisdiction rather than 
questions of judicial misconduct; 

(2) two inquiries were determined to involve allega- 
tions of conduct which did not rise to such a level as 
would warrant investigation by the Commission; 

(3) three inquiries were consolidated with two other 
matters in which investigations had been ordered; 

(4) 14 inquiries were determined to warrant no further 
action following completion of preliminary inves- 
tigations; and 

(5) one inquiry resulted in a recommendation of 
censure. 

Of the 15 inquiries pending at the end of the fiscal year: 

(1) five inquiries were awaiting initial review by the 
Commission; and 

(2) ten inquiries were awaiting completion of a preli- 
minary investigation or were subject to other 
action by the Commission. 



55 



PART III 
COURT RESOURCES 

• Financial 

• Personnel 



JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT FINANCES 



Under the State Constitution the operating expenses of 
the Judicial Department (all North Carolina courts) 
"other than compensation to process servers and other 
locally paid non-judicial officers" are required to be paid 
from State funds. It is customary legislative practice for 
the General Assembly to include appropriations for the 
operating expenses of all three branches of State govern- 
ment in a single budget bill, for a two-year period ending 
on June 30 of the odd-numbered years. The budget for the 
second year of the biennium is generally modified during 
the even-year legislative session. 

Building facilities for the appellate courts are provided 
by State funds, but, by statute, the county governments 
are required to provide from county funds for adequate 
facilities for the trial courts within each of the 100 
counties. 



Appropriations from the State's General Fund for 
operating expenses for all departments and agencies of 
State government, including the Judicial Department, 
totalled $5,715,172,032 for the 1987-88 fiscal year. 
(Appropriations from the Highway Fund and appropria- 
tions from the General Fund for capital improvements 
and debt servicing are not included in this total.) 

The appropriation from the General Fund for the 
operating expenses of the Judicial Department for 1987- 
88 was $ 1 6 1 , 1 28,433. (This included $2,532,298 for accrued 
attorney fees for indigent defendants paid in July 1988.) 
As illustrated in the chart below, this General Fund 
appropriation for the Judicial Department comprised 
2.8% of the General Fund appropriations for the operat- 
ing expenses of all State agencies and departments. 



TOTAL GENERAL FUND 
APPROPRIATIONS FOR 
OPERATING EXPENSES 

$5,715,172,032 





JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT 

APPROPRIATION 

$162,128,433 



2.8% 



59 



JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT FINANCES 



Appropriation from the State's general fund for operat- 
ing expenses of the Judicial Department over the past 
seven fiscal years are shown in the table below and in the 
graph at the top of the following page. For comparative 
purposes, appropriations from the general fund for oper- 



ating expenses of all State agencies and departments 
(including the Judicial Department) for the last seven 
fiscal years are also shown in the table below and in the 
second graph on the following page. 



APPROPRIATIONS FROM GENERAL FUND FOR OPERATING EXPENSES 







Judicial 


Department 


All State Agencies 


Fiscal Year 






% Increase over 




% Increase over 






Appropriation 


previous year 


Appropriation 


previous year 


1981-1982 




89,631,765 


8.08 


3,327,829,978 


7.94 


1982-1983 




93,927,824 


4.79 


3,477,547,375 


4.50 


1983-1984 




106,182,188 


13.05 


3,686,800,774 


6.02 


1984-1985 




121,035,791 


13.99 


4,237,230,681 


14.93 


1985-1986 




134,145,813 


10.83 


4,780,073,721 


12.81 


1986-1987 




146,394,689 


9.13 


5,153,322,580 


7.81 


1987-1988 




161,128,433 


10.06 


5,715,172,032 


10.90 


AVERAGE ANNUAL 










INCREASE, 


1982-1988 




9.99% 




9.27% 



60 



JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT FINANCES 

General Fund Appropriations for Operating Expenses 
Of the Judicial Department, 1981-82 — 1987-88 



$170,000,000 

$160,000,000 

$150,000,000 

140,000,000 

130,000,000 

120,000,000 

110,000,000 

100,000,000 

90,000,000 

80,000,000 

70,000,000 

60,000,000 

50,000,000 

40,000,000 

30,000,000 

20,000,000 

10,000,000 





61,128,43" 




1981-82 



1982-83 



1983-84 



1984-85 



1985-86 



1986-87 



1987-88 



General Fund Appropriations for Operating Expenses 
Of All State Agencies and Departments, 1981-82 — 1987-88 



$6,000,000,000 
5,000,000,000 
4,750,000,000 
4,500,000,000 
4,250,000,000 
4,000,000,000 
3,750,000,000 
3,500,000,000 
3,250,000,000 
3,000,000,000 
2,750,000,000 
2,500,000,000 
2,250,000,000 
2,000,000,000 
1,750,000,000 
1,500,000,000 
1,250,000,000 
1,000,000,000 
750,000,000 
500,000,000 
250,000,000 




$5,153,322,580 



$5,715,172,032 




1981-82 1982-83 1983-84 1984-85 1985-86 1986-87 1987- 



6! 



JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT FINANCES 
Expenditures July 1, 1987 — June 30, 1988 

General Fund expenditures for operating expenses of totalled $165,637,346, divided among the major budget 

the Judicial Department during the 1987-88 fiscal year classifications as shown below. 

%of 
Amount Total 

Supreme Court $2,352,654 1.42 

Court of Appeals 3.159.393 1.91 

Superior Courts 15,978,747 9.65 

District Courts 29,939,853 18.08 

Clerks of Superior Court 50,954,569 30.76 

Juvenile Probation and Aftercare 11,334,027 6.84 

Juvenile Probation and Aftercare $11,326,022 

Model Juvenile Court Project $8,005 
Representation for Indigents 22,626,046 13.66 

Assigned private counsel $15,158,686 

Guardian ad litem for juveniles $105,210 

Guardian ad litem — volunteer and contract program $1,332,851 

Public defenders $4,087,252 

Special counsel at mental hospitals $237,471 

Support services (expert witness fees, professional examinations, transcripts) $706,953 

Appellate Defender Services $521,177 

Indigency Screening $353,380 

N.C. death Penalty Resources Center $97,900 

Permanent Families Task Force $23,311 

Reasonable Efforts Program $1,855 
District Attorney Offices 19,249,255 11.62 

Office-District Attorney $19,014,218 

District Attorneys' Conference $100,943 

Prosecution Management System $23,166 

Victim Assistance, $51,519 

Narcotics Prosecution Program $59,409 
Administrative Office of the Courts 9,538,734 5.76 

General Administration $4,061,052 

Information Services $5,135,768 

Warehouse & Printing $341,914 
Judicial Standards Commission 72,144 .04 

Pilot Programs 432,934 .26 

Custody Mediation Pilot $98,370 

Dispute Settlement Center $248,961 

Arbitration Pilot Program $85,603 

TOTAL $165,637,346* 100.0 

*General Fund expenditures exceeded General Fund appropriations by $4,508,913. This amount included operating 
receipts of $4,109,310 plus operating cash balances of $399,603. 



62 



JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT FINANCES 
Expenditures, July 1, 1987 — June 30, 1988 



DISTRICT COURTS 

18.08% 



ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICE 
OF THE COURTS 

5.76% 



REPRESENTATION FOR 
INDIGENTS 13.66% 



JUDICIAL STANDARDS 
COMMISSION 0.04% 

JUVENILE 
SERVICES 6.89% 
DISPUTE RESOLUTION 
PROGRAMS 0.26% 




DISTRICT ATTORNEY PROGRAMS 

11.62% 



SUPERIOR COURTS 

9.65% 



SUPREME COURT 1.42% 
COURT OF APPEALS 1.919, 



CLERKS OF SUPERIOR COURT 30.76% 



As the above chart illustrates, most (70.1 1%) of Judi- 
cial Department expenditures goes for operation of the 
State's trial courts: operation of superior courts took 
9.7% of total expenditures; operation of the district courts 
(including magistrates, judges and court reporters) took 
1 8.08% of the total; the clerks' office, 30.76% of the total; 



and district attorneys programs, 1 1 .62% of total Judicial 
Department expenditures. 

The total General Fund expenditures of $165,637,346 
for 1987-88 represents a 10.06% increase over expendi- 
tures of $148,328,555 in 1986-87. 



General Fund Expenditures For The Judicial Department 
Fiscal Year 1981-82 - 1987-88 



$170,000,000 
$160,000,000 
$150,000,000 
140,000,000 
130,000,000 
120,000,000 
110,000,000 
100,000,000 



$165,637,346" 



$136,029,696- 



$122,061,777 




90,000,000 $88,531,892 

80,000,000 

70,000,000 

60,000,000 

50,000,000 

40,000,000 

30,000,000 

20,000,000 

10,000,000 



1981-82 



1982-83 



1983-84 



1984-85 



1985-86 



1986-87 



1987-88 



63 



JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT FINANCES 

Department Receipts 
July 1, 1987 - June 30, 1988 



Receipts for the Judicial Department in the 1987-88 
fiscal year totalled $98,217,285. The several sources of 
these receipts are shown in the table below. As in the 



previous years, the major source of receipts were General 
Court of Justice Fees paid by litigants in superior and 
district court. 



Source of Receipts 



Amount 



Supreme Court Fees 


$ 8,176 


Court of Appeals Fees 


33,570 


Miscellaneous 


128,562 


Sales of Appellate Division Reports 


268,509 


Grants 


294,182 


Department of Crime Control 


434,834 


1986-87 Equipment Obligation Carryover 


696,991 


Jail Fees 


836,023 


Ten-Day License Revocation Fees 


1,094,900 


Interest on Checking Account 


1,014,178 


Federal-Child Support Enforcement 


2,209,591 


Indigent Representation Judgments 


2,354,741 


Officer Fees 


5,351,748 


LEOB Fees 


7,466,250 


Judicial Facilities Fees 


7,804,677 


Fines and Forfeitures 


28,251,540 


General Court of Justice Fees 


39,968,813 


Total 


$ 98,217,285 



%of 
Total 

.01 

.04 

.13 

.27 

.30 

.44 

.71 

.85 

1.12 

1.03 

2.25 

2.40 

5.45 

7.60 

7.95 

28.76 

40.69 

100.00% 



This total of $98,217,285 is an increase of 10.2% over 
total 1986-87 receipts of $89,104,646. The graph below 



has been restated to reflect all Judicial Department 
receipts. 



Judicial Department Receipts, 1981-82 — 1987-88 



$100,000,000 
90,000,000 
80,000,000 
70,000,000 
60,000,000 
50,000,000 
40,000,000 
30,000,000 
20,000,000 
10,000,000 




.$98,217,285. 



■ $54,93 1,851 ' $55,474,257 




1981-82 



1982-83 



1983-84 



1984-85 



1985-86 



1986-87 



1987-88 



64 



JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT FINANCES 

Distribution of Judicial Department Receipts 
(July 1, 1987 - June 30, 1988) 



As required by the State Constitution, fines, penalties 
and forfeitures collected by the courts in criminal cases 
are distributed to the respective counties in which the 
cases are tried. These funds must be used by the counties 
for the support of the public schools. 

A uniform schedule of court costs for civil and criminal 
cases, comprising of a variety of fees, is set by statute for 
cases filed in the superior and district courts. Statutes 
prescribe the distribution of these fees and provide that 
certain fees shall be devoted to specific uses. For example, 
a facilities fee is included in court costs when costs are 
assessed, and this fee is paid over to the respective county 
or municipality which provided the facility used in the 
case. These fees must be utilized by the counties and 
municipalities to provide and maintain courtrooms and 
related judicial facilities. 

Officer fees (for arrest or service of process) are 
included, where applicable, in the cost of each case filed in 
the trial courts. If a municipal officer performed these 
services in a case, the fee is paid over to the respective 
municipality. Otherwise, all officer fees are paid to the 
respective counties in which the cases are filed. 

A jail fee is included in the costs of each case where 
applicable; these fees are distributed to the respective 
county or municipality whose facilities were used. Most 



Remitted to State Treasurer 

Supreme Court Fees 

Court of Appeals Fees 

Sales of Appellate Division Reports 

LEOB Fees 

General Court of Justice Fees 

Federal-Child Support Enforcement 

Total to State Treasurer 

Distributed to Counties 

Fines and Forfeitures 

Judicial Facilities Fees 

Officer Fees 

Jail Fees 

Ten-Day License Revocation Fees 

Total to Counties 

Distributed to Counties and Beneficiaries 

Interest on Checking Accounts 

Distributed to Municipalities 

Judicial Facilities Fees 

Officer Fees 

Jail Fees 

Total to Municipalities 

Operating Receipts 

Collection on Indigent Representation Judgments 

1986-87 Equipment Obligation Carryover 

Department of Crime Control 

Grants 

Federal-Child Supoport Enforcement 

Miscellaneous 

Total to Municipalities 

GRAND TOTAL 



jail facilities in the State are provided by the counties. 

A fee for the Law Enforcement Officers Benefit and 
Retirement Fund is included as a part of court costs when 
costs are assessed in a criminal case. As required by 
statute, the Judicial Department remits these fees to the 
State Treasurer, for deposit in the Law Enforcement 
Officers Benefit and Retirement Fund. 

Except as indicated, all superior and district court costs 
collected by the Judicial Department are paid into the 
State's General Fund, as are appellate court fees and 
proceeds from the sales of appellate division reports. 

When private counsel or a public defender is assigned 
to represent an indigent defendant in a criminal case, the 
trial judge sets the money value for the services rendered. 
If the defendant is convicted, a judgment lien is entered 
against him for such amount. Collections on these judg- 
ments are paid into and retained by the department to 
defray the costs of legal representation of indigents. 

Proceeds from the ten-day driver license revocation fee, 
which driving-while-impaired offenders must pay to rec- 
over their driver licenses, are distributed to the 
counties. 

Starting this fiscal year, the Federal Government funds 
a portion of child support enforcement costs. 





%of 


Amount 


Total 


$ 8,176 


.01 


33,570 


.04 


268,509 


.27 


7,466,250 


7.60 


39,968,813 


40.69 


2,009,591 


2.05 


49,754,909 


50.66 


28,251,540 


28.76 


7,432,973 


7.57 


3,389,248 


3.45 


832,025 


.85 


1,094,900 


1.12 


41,000,686 


41.75 



1,014,178 



1.03 



371,704 


.38 


1,962,500 


2.00 


3,998 


— 


2,338,202 


2.38 


2,354,741 


2.40 


696,991 


.71 


434,834 


.44 


294,182 


.30 


200,000 


.20 


128,562 


.13 


4,109,310 


4.18 


$98,217,285 


100.00% 



65 



JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT FINANCES 

Amounts of Fees, Fines and Forfeitures Collected by the Courts and 

Distributed to Counties and Municipalities* 

July 1, 1987 - June 30, 1988 



Distributed to Counties 



Distributed to Municipalities 





Facility 


Officer 


Jail 


Fines and 


Facility 


Officer 


Jail 




County 


Fees 


Fees 


Fees 


Forfeitures 


Fees 


Fees 


Fees 


Total 


Alamance 


117,043 


56,322 


26,067 


536,738 


-0- 


28,944 


-0- 


765,114 


Alexander 


24,524 


10,023 


5,952 


121,592 


-0- 


568 


-0- 


162,659 


Alleghany 


9,773 


5,670 


3,610 


48,503 


-0- 


558 


-0- 


68,114 


Anson 


37,580 


23,031 


1,537 


218,276 


-0- 


1,490 


-0- 


281,914 


Ashe 


16,700 


12,938 


2,275 


70,070 


-0- 


685 


-0- 


102,668 


Avery 


16,577 


10,601 


369 


68,320 


-0- 


1,016 


-0- 


96,883 


Beaufort 


64,515 


50,107 


22,493 


242,689 


-0- 


10,903 


-0- 


390,707 


Bertie 


23,852 


19,405 


1,517 


82,318 


-0- 


596 


-0- 


127,688 


Bladen 


40,807 


30,558 


630 


151,067 


1,015 


1,520 


-0- 


225,597 


Brunswick 


50,429 


28,884 


5,858 


171,876 


1,955 


2,001 


-0- 


261,003 


Buncombe 


202,610 


124,899 


2,962 


778,288 


-0- 


39,568 


-0- 


1,148,327 


Burke 


82,106 


38,671 


8,661 


315,402 


-0- 


8,984 


-0- 


453,824 


Cabarrus 


99,254 


53,669 


30,411 


466,903 


8,529 


39,453 


-0- 


698,219 


Caldwell 


74,187 


29,380 


3,328 


308,808 


-0- 


14,106 


-0- 


429,809 


Camden 


6,718 


5,236 


1,056 


34,770 


-0- 




-0- 


47,780 


Carteret 


71,584 


35,224 


1,557 


223,497 


-0- 


17,245 


-0- 


349,107 


Caswell 


23,430 


19,122 


2,347 


117,689 


-0- 




-0- 


162,588 


Catawba 


70,197 


50,450 


10,579 


580,108 


66,583 


34,259 


-0- 


812,176 


Chatham 


41,861 


39,238 


5,989 


214,536 


11,262 


2,025 


175 


315,086 


Cherokee 


23,193 


20,081 


5,112 


122,148 


-0- 


2,356 


10 


172,900 


Chowan 


15,469 


11,224 


537 


44,071 


-0- 


2,380 


-0- 


73,681 


Clay 


6,313 


4,700 


2,357 


33,688 


-0- 




-0- 


47,058 


Cleveland 


87,524 


37,495 


23,550 


336,563 


-0- 


9,694 


-0- 


494,826 


Columbus 


48,829 


47,017 


4,154 


206,892 


3,190 


2,749 


25 


312,856 


Craven 


95,527 


41,800 


14,942 


324,054 


3,945 


18,025 


-0- 


498,293 


Cumberland 


317,545 


96,670 


42,583 


810,842 


-0- 


83,833 


-0- 


1,351,473 


Currituck 


20,189 


15,771 


2,933 


112,016 


-0- 


-0- 


-0- 


150,909 


Dare 


64,228 


30,170 


8,702 


407,724 


-0- 


20,092 


-0- 


530,916 


Davidson 


92,301 


68,348 


12,525 


563,717 


12,979 


11,615 


-0- 


761,485 


Davie 


26,075 


19,087 


1,402 


95,309 


-0- 


246 


-0- 


142,119 


Duplin 


44,590 


23,298 


8,826 


187,517 


-0- 


828 


280 


265,339 


Durham 


277,285 


87,887 


13,908 


977,418 


-0- 


94,155 


-0- 


1,450,653 


Edgecombe 


53,132 


60,327 


13,221 


209,544 


39,889 


23,622 


400 


400,135 


Forsyth 


317,433 


21,109 


32,773 


996,283 


3,595 


131,655 


-0- 


1,502,848 


Franklin 


34,384 


22,301 


4,972 


146,286 


-0- 


623 


-0- 


208,566 


Gaston 


167,094 


98,105 


4,811 


510,033 


-0- 


25,215 


-0- 


805,258 


Gates 


11,087 


7,952 


642 


56,420 


-0- 


-0- 


-0- 


76,101 


Graham 


5,895 


4,965 


2,808 


48,371 


-0- 


30 


-0- 


62,075 


Granville 


37,113 


17,983 


5,649 


123,924 


S7 


280 


244 


185,280 


Greene 


15,549 


11,248 


883 


55,116 


-0- 


-0- 


-0- 


82,796 


Guilford 


429,295 


51,555 


7,541 


978,604 


-0- 


155,900 


-0- 


1,622,895 


Halifax 


73,221 


55,679 


11,956 


298,138 


5,789 


12,907 


56 


457,746 


Harnett 


53,692 


40,638 


12,164 


282,146 


10,063 


4,174 


170 


403,047 


Haywood 


48,495 


35,862 


24,672 


294,679 


619 


2,745 


-0- 


407,072 


Henderson 


63,215 


34,607 


12,041 


259,031 


130 


3,252 


-0- 


372,276 


Hertford 


30,324 


20,789 


5,541 


104,219 


-0- 


1,496 


-0- 


162,369 


Hoke 


33,515 


22,475 


15,167 


202,665 


-0- 


1,956 


-0- 


275,778 


Hyde 


9,690 


7,548 


2,183 


54,764 


-0- 




-0- 


74,185 


Iredell 


90,514 


43,989 


12,829 


424,297 


14,314 


18,344 


254 


604,541 


Jackson 


23,382 


17,279 


5,883 


114,736 


-0- 




-0- 


161,280 



66 



JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT FINANCES 

Amounts of Fees, Fines and Forfeitures Collected by the Courts and 

Distributed to Counties and Municipalities* 

July 1, 1987 - June 30, 1988 



Distributed to Counties 



Distributed to Municipalities 





Facility 


Officer 


Jail 


Fines and 


Facility 


Officer 


Jail 




County 


Fees 


Fees 


Fees 


Forfeitures 


Fees 


Fees 


Fees 


Total 


Johnston 


33,483 


57,375 


27,572 


415,248 


19,086 


13,081 


328 


566,173 


Jones 


12,256 


7,130 


110 


36,790 


-0- 


1,400 


-0- 


57,686 


Lee 


51,758 


29,147 


23,250 


218,845 


-0- 


8,776 


-0- 


331,776 


Lenoir 


75,808 


33,508 


11,597 


283,008 


-0- 


14,201 


-0- 


418,122 


Lincoln 


45,955 


29,633 


2,966 


173,672 


-0- 


4,265 


-0- 


256,491 


Macon 


19,967 


14,137 


590 


88,849 


-0- 


828 


-0- 


124,371 


Madison 


13,457 


10,606 


518 


56,850 


-0- 


308 


-0- 


81,739 


Martin 


34,934 


25,502 


1,472 


135,743 


-0- 


1,884 


-0- 


199,535 


McDowell 


34,618 


20,995 


1,245 


186,699 


-0- 


4,224 


-0- 


247,781 


Mecklenburg 


686,967 


76,383 


8 


1,965,699 


-0- 


428,668 


-0- 


3,157,725 


Mitchell 


9,649 


6,056 


1,624 


39,515 


-0- 


828 


-0- 


57,672 


Montgomery 


36,446 


26,513 


5,675 


143,070 


-0- 


3,308 


-0- 


215,012 


Moore 


61,630 


41,232 


4,331 


337,157 


4,225 


9,144 


-0- 


457,719 


Nash 


60,187 


68,078 


9,132 


312,572 


54,264 


25,792 


1,014 


531,039 


New Hanover 


175,913 


40,813 


4,524 


525,609 


-0- 


46,448 


-0- 


793,307 


Northampton 


33,810 


28,864 


2,129 


183,748 


1,195 


1,866 


-0- 


251,612 


Onslow 


153,711 


73,232 


22,619 


519,180 


-0- 


61,518 


-0- 


830,260 


Orange 


52,427 


42,635 


8,195 


273,554 


27,813 


15,339 


254 


420,217 


Pamlico 


10,120 


8,168 


740 


148,043 


-0- 


-0- 


-0- 


167,071 


Pasquotank 


36,377 


17,870 


9,846 


168,212 


-0- 


9,935 


-0- 


242,240 


Pender 


28,421 


21,104 


2,833 


121,558 


-0- 


456 


-0- 


174,372 


Perquimans 


13,120 


8,825 


335 


43,145 


-0- 


1,006 


-0- 


66,431 


Person 


28,708 


20,790 


2,708 


122,365 


-0- 


3,561 


-0- 


178,132 


Pitt 


128,869 


52,169 


17,879 


470,974 


11,671 


38,931 


634 


721,127 


Polk 


14,105 


10,256 


625 


80,287 


-0- 


392 


-0- 


105,665 


Randolph 


89,752 


76,730 


5,590 


392,899 


2;825 


11,624 


-0- 


579,420 


Richmond 


51,538 


31,482 


7,792 


229,400 


-0- 


2,067 


-0- 


322,279 


Robeson 


98,228 


80,380 


15,231 


551,114 


35,386 


29,005 


145 


809,489 


Rockingham 


75,978 


38,836 


6,017 


525,944 


20,702 


20,171 


-0- 


687,648 


Rowan 


94,612 


57,590 


28,450 


399,083 


-0- 


29,814 


-0- 


609,549 


Rutherford 


57,250 


34,560 


7,519 


260,024 


-0- 


7,590 


-0- 


366,943 


Sampson 


63,824 


44,690 


8,339 


267,228 


-0- 


4,396 


-0- 


388,477 


Scotland 


43,602 


28,319 


3,044 


154,883 


-0- 


6,403 


-0- 


236,251 


Stanly 


40,981 


14,643 


3,806 


228,548 


-0- 


8,928 


-0- 


296,906 


Stokes 


27,688 


16,112 


5,087 


135,707 


-0- 


1,108 


-0- 


185,702 


Surry 


67,838 


45,579 


2,931 


287,881 


1,635 


9,354 


-0- 


415,238 


Swain 


14,592 


10,725 


4,287 


67,871 


-0- 


124 


-0- 


97,599 


Transylvania 


18,518 


15,417 


4,687 


77,705 


-0- 


2,016 


-0- 


118,343 


Tyrrell 


13,770 


11,092 


1,365 


43,216 


-0- 


-0- 


-0- 


69,443 


Union 


87,023 


67,244 


15,957 


418,770 


-0- 


17,563 


-0- 


606,557 


Vance 


56,391 


20,196 


6,606 


172,469 


-0- 


7,906 


-0- 


263,568 


Wake 


642,757 


88,218 


39,995 


1,583,881 


7,515 


222,335 


5 


2,584,706 


Warren 


21,160 


17,336 


2,892 


73,139 


-0- 


180 


-0- 


114,707 


Washington 


15,394 


10,543 


2,927 


47,039 


-0- 


1,982 


-0- 


77,885 


Watauga 


31,610 


19,117 


3,174 


107,677 


-0- 


4,576 


-0- 


166,154 


Wayne 


96,423 


55,058 


9,804 


324,316 


1,443 


21,445 


4 


508,493 


Wilkes 


59,731 


33,529 


3,723 


294,971 


-0- 


2,298 


-0- 


394,252 


Wilson 


80,393 


51,089 


7,202 


212,500 


-0- 


21,608 


-0- 


372,792 


Yadkin 


30,952 


20,735 


18,345 


168,711 


-0- 


1,472 


-0- 


240,215 


Yancey 


10,409 


7,620 


270 


43,511 


-0- 


276 


-0- 


62,086 


State Totals 


$7,432,973 


$3,389,248 


$832,025 


$28,251,540 


$371,704 


$1,962,500 


$3,998 


$42,243,988 



♦Facility and jail fees are distributed to the respective counties and municipalities which furnished the facilities. If the officer who made 
the arrest or served the process was employed by a municipality, the officer fee is distributed to the municipality; otherwise all officer 
fees are distributed to the respective counties. By provision of the State Constitution, fines and forfeitures collected by the courts within 
a county are distributed to that county for support of the public schools. 

67 



JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT FINANCES 

Cost and Case Data on Representation of Indigents 
July 1, 1987 - June 30, 1988 



The State provides legal counsel for indigent persons in 
a variety of actions and proceedings, as specified in the 
North Carolina General Statutes, Sections 7A-450 etseq. 
These include criminal proceedings, judicial hospitaliza- 
tion proceedings, juvenile proceedings which may result 
in commitment to an institution or transfer to superior 
court for trial as an adult. Legal representation for indi- 
gents may be by assignment of private counsel, by 
assignment of special public counsel (involving mental 
hospital commitments), or by assignment of a public 
defender. 

Seven of North Carolina's judicial districts have an 
office of public defender: Districts 3, 12, 15B, 18,26, 27A, 
and 28. The other 27 districts utilize only assignments of 
private counsel. Private counsel may also be assigned in 
the seven districts which have a public defender in the 
event of a conflict of interest involving the public defend- 
er's office and the indigent and in the event of unusual 
circumstances when, in the opinion of the court, the 
proper administration of justice requires the assignment 
of private counsel rather than the public defender in those 
cases. 

The Appellate Defender Office began operation as a 
State-funded program on October 1, 1981. (Prior to 
October 1, 1981, appellate defender services were funded 
by a one-year federal grant.) Pursuant to assignments 
made by trial court judges, it is the responsibility of the 
Appellate Defender and his staff to provide criminal 
defense appellate services to indigent persons who are 
appealing their convictions to either the Supreme Court 
or the Court of Appeals. The Appellate Defender is under 
the general supervision of the Chief Justice. The Chief 
Justice may, consistent with the resources available to the 
Appellate Defender and to insure quality criminal defense 
services, authorize certain appeals to be assigned to a 
local public defender office or to private assigned counsel 



instead of to the Appellate Defender. The cost data 
reported reflects the activity of this office in both the 
Supreme Court and Court of Appeals for the fiscal year 
ending June 30, 1988. 

In addition, the State provides a full-time special coun- 
sel at each of the State's four mental hospitals, to repre- 
sent patients in commitment or recommitment hearings 
before a district court judge. Under North Carolina law, 
each patient committed to a mental hospital is entitled to 
a judicial hearing (before a district court judge) within 90 
days after the initial commitment, a further hearing 
within 180 days after the initial commitment, and there- 
after a hearing once each year during the continuance of 
an involuntary commitment. 

A juvenile alleged to be within the jurisdiction of the 
court has the right to be represented by counsel in all 
proceedings; and juveniles are conclusively presumed to 
be indigent and entitled to State-appointed and State- 
paid counsel (G.S. 7A-584). When a petition alleges that a 
juvenile is abused or neglected, the judge is required to 
appoint a guardian ad litem. If the guardian ad litem is 
not an attorney, the judge in addition is to appoint an 
attorney to represent the juvenile's interests (G.S. 7A- 
586). And where a juvenile petition alleges that a juvenile 
is abused, neglected or dependent, the parent has a right 
to appointed counsel in cases of indigency (G.S. 7A-587). 

The cost of all programs of indigent representation, 
rounded to the nearest dollar, was $22,626,046 in the 
1 987-88 fiscal year, compared to $ 1 8,392, 1 36 in the 1 986- 
87 fiscal year, an increase of 23%. The total amount 
expended for these activities was 13.7% of total Judicial 
Department expenditures in the 1987-88 fiscal year. 

Following is a summary of case and cost data for 
representation of indigents for the fiscal year, July 1, 1987 
through June 30, 1988. 



68 



. 



JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT FINANCES 

Cost and Case Data on Representation of Indigents 
July 1, 1987 - June 30, 1988 



Number 
of Cases 

647 

48,419 

6,976 

56,042 

691 



Total 
Cost 

; 2,303,323 

11,887,697 

967,666 

15,158,686 

105,210 



1,332,851 



Average 
Per Case 



3,560 
245 
139 
270 



152 



Assigned Private Counsel 

Capital offense cases 
Adult cases (other than capital) 
Juvenile cases 
Totals 

Guardian ad litem for juveniles 

Guardian ad litem volunteer and 
contract program 

Public Defender Offices** 

*District 3 
District 12 
District 15B 
District 18 
District 26 
District 27A 
District 28 
Totals 



Appellate Defender Office 
Special Counsel at mental hospitals 

Support Services 

Transcripts, records and briefs 
Professional examinations 
Expert witness fees 
Total 

Indigency Screening 

N.C. Death Penalty Resource Center 

Permanent Family Task Force 

Reasonable Efforts Program 

GRAND TOTAL 

♦The Public Defender's Office serves only Pitt and Carteret Counties in Judicial District 3. 

**The number of "cases" shown is the number of defendants in cases disposed of by public defenders during the 1987-88 year. 



1,783 
2,732 
1,051 
3,149 

11,785 
2,335 
2,121 

24,956 


364,080 
663,601 
221,061 
798,594 

1,225,733 
431,278 
382,905 

4,087,252 

521,177 
237,471 

531,119 

22,954 

152,880 

706,953 

353,380 

97,900 

23,311 

1,855 

$22,626,046 


204 
243 
210 
254 
104 
185 
181 
164 



69 



JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT FINANCES 

Special Counsel at Mental Hospitals 
July 1, 1987 - June 30, 1988 



The total cost of providing special counsel at each of 
the State's four mental hospitals, to represent patients in 
commitment or recommitment hearings, was $237,471 
for the 1987-88 fiscal year. There was a total of 11,236 
hearings held during the year, for an average cost per 
hearing of $21.13 for the special counsel service. 



The following table presents data on the hearings held 
at each of the mental hospitals in 1987-88. There were 492 
more hearings held in 1987-88 than in 1986-87, an 
increase of 4.6% in total hearings. 



Broughton Cherry 



Initial Hearings resulting in: 

Commitment to hospital 
Commitment to outpatient clinic 
Discharge 

Total 

First Rehearings resulting in: 



865 
512 
697 

2,074 



1,463 
199 
431 

2,093 



Dorothea 
Dix 

724 

99 

491 

1,314 



John 
Umstead 

1,235 
478 
607 

2,320 



Totals 

4,287 
1,288 
2,226 

7,801 



Commitment to hospital 
Commitment to outpatient clinic 
Discharge 


131 
38 
26 


334 

16 

123 


183 

38 
31 


309 

17 

79 


957 
109 
259 


Total 


195 


473 


252 


405 


1,325 


Second or Subsequent Rehearings resulting in: 

Commitment to hospital 
Commitment to outpatient clinic 
Discharge 


271 

8 

12 


428 


2 


358 

9 

20 


684 
2 

87 


1,741 

19 

121 


Total 


291 


430 


387 


773 


1,881 


Modification of Prior Order Hearings resulting in: 

Commitment to hospital 
Commitment to outpatient clinic 
Discharge 


16 

20 

6 


5 
20 
15 


12 
31 

7 


2 

95 




35 

166 

28 


Total 


42 


40 


50 


97 


229 


Total Hearings or Rehearings resulting in: 

Commitment to hospital 
Commitment to outpatient clinic 
Discharge 


1,283 
578 
741 


2,230 
235 

571 


1,277 
177 
549 


2,230 
592 
773 


7,020 
1,582 
2,634 


Grand Totals 


2,602 


3,036 


2,003 


3,595 


11,236 



70 



JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT FINANCES 

Assigned Counsel and Guardian Ad Litem 

Number of Cases and Expenditures 

July 1, 1987 — June 30, 1988 







Assigned Counsel 


Guardi: 


an Ad Litem 


District I 


Number of Cases 


Expenditures 


Number of Cases 


Expenditures 


Camden 

Chowan 

Currituck 

Dare 

Gates 

Pasquotank 

Perquimans 


30 

61 

74 
186 

61 
346 

66 


12,002 
12,873 
20,452 
61,493 
15,466 
89,687 
13,842 


5 
5 

10 
3 

2 

46 

1 


499 
250 

1,060 
475 
429 

2,678 
201 


District 


Totals 


824 


225,814 


72 


5,592 


District 2 












Beaufort 
Hyde 

Martin 
Tyrrell 
Washington 


391 
41 

200 
39 

117 


104,715 
10,376 
53,596 
28,954 
29,850 


9 

2 





600 

250 





300 


District 


Totals 


788 


227,490 


14 


1,150 


District 3 












Carteret 
Craven 
Pamlico 
Pitt 




102 

809 

65 

444 


30,196 
219,856 

16,785 
172,016 


7 
4 


8 


553 

900 



645 


District 


Totals 


1,420 


438,853 


19 


2,098 


District 4 












Duplin 
Jones 
Onslow 
Sampson 




317 

35 

1,313 

323 


108,631 

10,515 

339,007 

102,323 


6 



33 

1 


1,015 



3,170 

200 


District 


Totals 


1,988 


560,476 


40 


4,385 


District 5 












New Hanover 
Pender 


1,393 
147 


429,244 
40,625 










District 


Totals 


1,540 


469,869 








District 6 












Bertie 
Halifax 
Hertford 
Northampl 


on 


144 
454 
260 
166 


34,171 
140,514 

60,715 
111,153 


2 

6 

10 

II 


300 

525 
1,150 
1,475 


District 


Totals 


1,024 


346,553 


29 


3,450 


District 7 












Edgecombe 

Nash 
Wilson 


705 
710 
876 


210,664 
217,759 
312,763 


2 

11 

3 


600 

1,500 

450 


District 


Totals 


2,291 


741,186 


16 


2,550 



71 



JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT FINANCES 

Assigned Counsel and Guardian Ad Litem 

Number of Cases and Expenditures 

July 1, 1987 - June 30, 1988 







Assigned 


Counsel 


Guardian Ad Litem 


District 8 


Number of Cases 


Expenditures 


Number of Cases 


Expenditures 


Greene 
Lenoir 
Wayne 




106 

702 

1,076 


28,286 

168,310 

. 284,295 





1 






200 


District 


Totals 


1,884 


480,892 


1 


200 


District 9 












Franklin 

Granville 

Person 

Vance 

Warren 




344 
431 
371 
530 
154 


88,901 
123,594 
132,876 
162,809 

46,503 


2 
4 
12 
2 
2 


200 

470 

2,020 

1,350 

300 


District 


Totals 


1,830 


554,683 


22 


4,340 


District 10 












Wake 




4,916 


1,352,264 


5 


1,441 


District 


Totals 


4,916 


1,352,264 


5 


1,441 


District 11 












Harnett 

Johnston 

Lee 




649 

1,074 

598 


105,586 

136,257 

92,315 


! 


1 


75 



75 


District 


Totals 


2,321 


334,159 


2 


150 


District 12 












Cumberland 
Hoke 


721 
32 


325,291 
28,389 


9 

1 


1,868 
232 


District 


Totals 


753 


353,680 


10 


2,099 


District 13 












Bladen 

Brunswick 

Columbus 




493 
527 
598 


190,551 
165,970 
140,834 


3 

3 

19 


1,450 

400 

2,510 


District 


Totals 


1,618 


497,355 


25 


4,360 


District 14 












Durham 




3,176 


727,444 


12 


2,636 


District 


Totals 


3,176 


727,444 


17 


2,636 


District 15 A 










Alamance 




1,056 


278,841 


3 


175 


District 


Totals 


1,056 


278,841 


3 


175 


District 15 B 










Chatham 
Orange 




82 
324 


17,804 
94,479 


3 
10 


1,125 
1,105 


District 


Totals 


406 


112,283 


13 


2,230 


District 16 












Robeson 
Scotland 




1,569 

554 


463,079 
99,002 


42 
15 


3,755 
790 


District 


Totals 


2,123 


562,081 


57 


4,545 



72 



JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT FINANCES 

Assigned Counsel and Guardian Ad Litem 

Number of Cases and Expenditures 

July 1, 1987 - June 30, 1988 





A 


Assigned ( 


Counsel 


Guardiai 


i Ad Litem 


District 17 


Number of Cases 


Expenditures 


Number of Cases 


Expenditures 


Caswell 
Rockingham 


146 
1,003 


40,407 
261,281 


6 
6 


500 
675 


District 


Totals 


1,149 


301,688 


12 


1,175 


District 17 B 










Stokes 
Surry 




242 
601 


69,939 
151,719 


I 



150 



District 


Totals 


843 


221,657 


1 


150 


District 18 












Guilford 




723 


243,803 


19 


2,940 


District 


Totals 


723 


243,803 


19 


2,940 


District 19 A 










Cabarrus 
Rowan 




852 
1,196 


245,266 
254,587 


12 
19 


1,560 
2,410 


District 


Totals 


2,048 


499,853 


31 


3,970 


District 19B 










Montgomery 
Randolph 


216 

758 


52,109 
189,109 


5 
21 


930 

2,225 


District 


Totals 


974 


241,218 


26 


3,155 


District 20 












Anson 

Moore 

Richmond 

Stanly 

Union 




362 
671 
808 
398 
973 


80,965 
149,013 
236,461 

89,453 
207,218 


12 
3 
4 
4 


1,550 
400 
550 
400 


District 


Totals 


3,212 


763,110 


23 


2,900 


District 21 












Forsyth 




3,341 


672,769 


15 


1,450 


District 


Totals 


3,341 


672,769 


15 


1,450 


District 22 












Alexander 
Davidson 
Davie 
Iredell 




262 
1,454 

196 
1,224 


91,128 
392,650 

48,936 
278,126 


22 
2 
2 


2,800 
550 
300 


District 


Totals 


3,136 


810,839 


26 


3,650 


District 23 












Alleghany 
Ashe 
Wilkes 
Yadkin 




64 
145 
575 
201 


9,719 
28,681 
88,631 
38,118 


4 

i 

31 

4 


350 

50 

1,840 

400 


District 


Totals 


985 


165,150 

73 


40 


2,640 



JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT FINANCES 

Assigned Counsel and Guardian Ad Litem 

Number of Cases and Expenditures 

July 1, 1987 - June 30, 1988 





Assigned Counsel 


Guardian Ad Litem 


District 24 


Number of Cases 


Expenditures 


Number of Cases 


Expenditures 


Avery 

Madison 

Mitchell 

Watauga 

Yancey 


189 
138 
112 
315 

73 


47,274 
36,069 
28,925 
99,860 

23,578 


8 
1 
10 
4 
4 


3,638 
1,000 
2,100 
1,300 
1,062 


District Totals 


827 


235,704 


27 


9,100 


District 25 










Burke 

Caldwell 

Catawba 


643 

817 

1,315 


152,780 
208,358 
319,948 


4 
I 
5 


425 

60 

650 


District Totals 


2,775 


681,086 


10 


1,135 


District 26 










Mecklenburg 


1,902 


885,791 


58 


20,003 


District Totals 


1,902 


885,791 


58 


20,003 


District 27 A 










Gaston 


222 


55,607 


6 


475 


District Totals 


222 


55,607 


6 


475 


District 27 B 










Cleveland 
Lincoln 


463 
174 


94,942 
46,275 


10 
2 


985 
450 


District Totals 


637 


141,217 


12 


1,435 


District 28 










Buncombe 


429 


108,461 


8 


1,025 


District Totals 


429 


108,461 


8 


1,025 


District 29 










Henderson 

McDowell 

Polk 

Rutherford 

Transylvania 


556 

339 

67 

457 
187 


157,192 
108,667 

20,929 
121,965 

62,395 


2 

2 
I 

2 
2 


1,240 
370 
100 

225 
1,455 


District Totals 


1,606 


471,148 


9 


3,390 


District 30 










Cherokee 

Clay 

Graham 

Haywood 

Jackson 

Macon 

Swain 


202 

28 

72 

422 

145 

314 

92 


89,202 
9,235 
23,398 
154,095 
39,866 
43,603 
36,260 


2 

2 
10 
4 
3 
2 


200 


150 
2,805 
185 
985 
893 


District Totals 


1,275 


395,659 


23 


5,218 


STATE TOTALS 


56,042 


$15,158,686 


691 


$105,210 



74 



JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT PERSONNEL 

(Positions and salaries authorized as of June 30, 1988) 

Positions 

Authorized Salary Ranges 

SUPREME COURT 

7 Justices $ 76,236-77,844* 

28 Staff personnel (Clerk's and Reporter's offices, 

law clerks, library staff) $ 12,235-57,356 

7 Secretarial personnel $ 24,520-25,656 

COURT OF APPEALS 

12 Judges $ 72,180-73,800* 

39 Staff personnel (Clerk's office, prehearing staff, 

Judicial Standards Commission staff, law clerks) $ 14,654-49,960 

12 Secretarial personnel $ 23,474-24,520 

SUPERIOR COURT 

74 Judges $ 64,092-66,204* 

84 Staff personnel $ 20,832-48,108 

67 Secretarial personnel $ 13,812-28,920 

DISTRICT COURT 

151 Judges $ 54,372-56,532* 

640 Magistrates $ 14,076-24,036 

29 Staff personnel $ 14,952-31,692 

25 Secretarial personnel $ 14,352-26,412 

DISTRICT ATTORNEYS 

35 District Attorneys $ 59,628* 

277 Staff personnel $ 19,104-38,568 

125 Secretarial personnel $ 14,352-24,252 

CLERKS OF SUPERIOR COURT 

100 Clerks of Superior Court $ 34,728-51,516* 

1,635 Staff personnel $ 13,812-29,580 

INDIGENT REPRESENTATION 

1 Appellate Defender $ 59,628 

6 Assistant Appellate Defenders $ 27,834-40,434 

3 Secretarial personnel $ 14,946-22,214 

7 Public Defenders $ 59,628* 

73 Staff personnel $ 17,628-38,568 

22 Secretarial personnel $ 14,352-24,252 

4 Special counsel at mental hospitals $ 1 1,034-33,504 

4 Secretarial personnel $ 14,952-22,212 

1 Guardian ad Litem, Program Administrator $ 39,464 

21 Program Coordinators $ 10,315-24,255 

2 Program Analyst $ 12,128-21,735 

13 Secretarial personnel $ 6,642-16,582 

JUVENILE PROBATION AND AFTERCARE 

286 Court counselors $ 19,102-43,823 

47 Secretarial personnel $ 14,352-23,100 

ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICE OF THE COURTS 

1 Administrative Officer of the Courts $ 66,204* 

1 Assistant Director $ 53,964* 

153 Staff personnel $ 14,352-66,000 

*In addition to the salaries given here, these categories are entitled to a longevity allowance for years of service. 



75 



PART IV 
TRIAL COURTS CASEFLOW DATA 

• Superior Court Division 

• District Court Division 



TRIAL COURTS CASE DATA 



This part of the Annual Report presents pertinent data 
on a district-by-district and county-by-county basis. For 
ease of reference, this part is divided into a superior court 
division section and a district court division section. 

The data within the two sections generally parallel each 
other in terms of organization, with each section subdi- 
vided into civil and criminal case categories. With some 
exceptions, there are three basic data tables for each case 
category: a caseload inventory (filings, dispositions and 
pending) table; a table on the manner of dispositions; and a 
table on ages of cases disposed of during the year and ages 
of cases pending at the end of the year. Pending and age 
data are not provided for district court motor vehicle crim- 
inal cases, for civil cases (small claims) referred to magis- 
trates, and for juvenile cases, inasmuch as these categories 
of cases are not reported by case file number. 

The caseload inventory tables provide a statistical pic- 
ture of caseflow during the 1987-88 year. Items recorded in 
this table include the number of cases pending at the begin- 
ning of the year, the number of new cases filed, the number 
of cases disposed of during the year, and the number of 
cases left pending at the end of the year. The caseload 
inventory also shows the total caseload (the number pend- 
ing at the beginning of the year plus the number filed during 
the year) and the percentage of the caseload which was 
disposed of during the year. 

The aging tables show the ages of the cases pending on 
June 30, 1988 as well as the ages of the cases disposed of 
during 1987-88. These tables also show both mean (aver- 
age) and median ages for each set of cases — those pending 
at the end of the year and those that were disposed of during 
the year. The median age of a group of cases is, by defini- 
tion, the age of a hypothetical case which is older than 50% 
of the total set of cases and younger than the other 50%. 

Unlike the median, the mean age can be substantially 
raised (or lowered) if even a small number of very old (or 
very young) cases are included. For example, if only a 
single two-year old case was included among ten cases aged 
three months, the median age would be 90 days and the 
mean (average) age would be 148.2 days. A substantial 
difference between the median and average ages, therefore, 
indicates the presence of a number of rather long-pending, 
or short-pending, cases. 

The bulk of caseload statistics is now handled by auto- 
mated processing rather than manual processing. As of 
June 30, 1988, 60 of the 100 counties were operational on 
the criminal and infractions modules of the Administrative 



Office of the Court's Court Information System (CIS). 
These counties handled nearly 82% of the total criminal 
and infractions case filings in the state. (Not included in 
these figures is Mecklenburg County, which has its own 
county-based processing system and accounts for an addi- 
tional 8% of the state's total criminal and infactions case- 
load.) By the end of the fiscal year, there were also fourteen 
counties automated on the civil indexing module of CIS. 
These counties accounted for 52% of the total civil filings in 
FY 87-88. 

The case statistics in Part IV have been summarized from 
the automated filing and disposition case data, as well as 
from manually reported case data from those counties not 
yet automated. Pending case information is calculated 
from the filing and disposition data. The accuracy of the 
pending case figures is, of course, dependent upon timely 
and accurate data on filing and dispositions. 

Periodic comparisons by clerk personnel of their actual 
pending case files against the Administrative Office of the 
Court's (AOC's) computer-produced pending case lists, 
followed by indicated corrections, is necessary to maintain 
completely accurate data in the AOC computer file. Yet, 
staff resource in the clerks' offices is not sufficient to make 
such physical inventory checks as frequently and as com- 
pletely as would be necessary to maintain full accuracy in 
the AOC's computer files. Thus, it is recognized that some 
of the figures published in the following tables have errors 
of some degree. 

Another accuracy-related problem inherent in the AOC's 
reporting system is the lack of absolute consistency in the 
published year-end and year-beginning pending figures. 
The number of cases pending at the end of a reporting year 
should ideally be identical to the number of published 
pending cases at the beginning of the next reporting year. In 
reality, this is rarely the case. Experience has shown that 
inevitably some filings and dispositions that occurred in the 
preceding year do not get reported until the subsequent 
year. The later-reported data are regarded as being more 
complete and are used in the current year's tables, thereby 
producing some differences between the prior year's end- 
pending figures and the current year's beginning-pending 
figures. 

Notwithstanding the indicated limitations in the data 
reporting and data-processing system, it is believed that the 
published figures are sufficiently adequate to fully justify 
their use. In any event, the published figures are the best 
and most accurate data currently available. 



79 



PART IV, Section 1 



Superior Court Division 
Caseflow Data 



The Superior Court Division 



This section contains data tables and accompanying 
charts depicting the 1987-88 caseflow of cases pending, 
filed, and disposed of in the State's superior courts before 
superior court judges. Data are also presented on cases 
filed and disposed of before the 100 clerks of superior 
court, who have original jurisdiction over estate cases and 
special proceedings. 

There are, for statistical reporting purposes, three cate- 
gories of cases filed in the superior courts: civil cases 
(excluding estates and special proceedings), felony cases 
that are within the original jurisdiction of the superior 
courts, and misdemeanor appeals from the district courts 
to superior courts for trial de novo. 

During 1987-88, as in previous years, the greatest pro- 
portion of superior court filings were felonies (52.3%), 
followed by misdemeanor appeals (31.8%) and civil cases 
(15.9%). Following the general trend over the past 
decade, the total number of case filings increased signifi- 
cantly. During 1987-88, total case filings in superior 
courts increased by 6.9% from the preceding fiscal year 
(from 98,886 total cases to 105,704). Filings of civil cases 
increased by 8.7%, felony filings increased by 8.0%, and 
misdemeanor appeal filings increased by 4.3%. 

Superior court civil cases generally take much longer to 
dispose of than do criminal cases. During 1987-88, the 
median age at disposition of civil cases was 293 days, 
compared to a median age at disposition of 86 days for 
felonies and 70 days for misdemeanors. A similar pattern 
exists for the ages of pending cases. The median ages of 
superior court cases pending at the end of the fiscal year, 
June 30, 1988, was 219 days for civil cases, 79 days for 
felonies, and 78 days for misdemeanors. 

These differences in the median ages of civil versus 
criminal cases in superior courts can be attributed in part 
to the priority given criminal cases. In criminal cases, a 
defendant has a right to a "speedy trial" guaranteed by 
both the United States and North Carolina Constitutions 
and by the North Carolina Speedy Trial Act (G.S. 15A- 
701 et seq.). The Speedy Trial Act requires cases to go to 
trial within 120 days of filing unless there has been justifi- 
able delay for one or more of the reasons set out in the 
statute. During 1987-88, 52 criminal cases were dismissed 
under the Speedy Trial Act, an increase of 8.3% as com- 
pared to the 48 cases dismissed under the Act during 
1986-87. 

There is no comparable statutory standard for speedy 
disposition of civil cases in North Carolina, although the 
North Carolina Constitution does provide that "right and 



justice shall be administered without favor, denial, or 
delay" (Article I, Section 18, N.C. Constitution). 

From 1986-87 to 1987-88, the median ages of pending 
cases and of cases at disposition in the superior courts 
have decreased for both civil and criminal cases. For cases 
at disposition, the median ages decreased from 299 days 
to 293 days for civil cases, from 91 days to 86 days for 
felony cases, and from 71 days to 70 days for misdemea- 
nor cases. Compared to ages of cases pending on June 30, 
1988, the median ages of cases pending on June 30,1 988, 
decreased from 224 days to 219 days for civil cases, from 
88 days to 79 days for felony cases, and from 83 days to 78 
days for misdemeanor cases. 

The three major case categories (civil, felonies, and 
misdemeanors) may be broken down into more specific 
case types. In the civil category, negligence cases com- 
prised 45.6% of total civil findings in superior courts 
(7,639 of 16,756 total civil filings). Contract cases com- 
prised the next largest category of civil case filings, at 
23.7% (3,969 filings). Felony case filings were dominated 
by the following types of cases: burglary and breaking or 
entering, 2 1 .4% ( 1 1 ,823 of 55,284 total filings); controlled 
substances violations, 20.4% (1 1,283 filings); forgery and 
uttering, 12.1% (6,691 filings); and larceny, 1 1.7% (6,454 
filings). Non-motor vehicle appeals comprised 54.1% of 
misdemeanor filings in superior courts (18,209 of 33,664 
total filings). 

Case dispositions in 1987-88 increased by 4.7% over 
last fiscal year (from 96,308 to 100,808 superior court 
dispositions). Jury trials continued to account for a low 
percentage of case dispositions: 5.7% of civil cases (896 of 
15,685 civil dispositions); 3.8% of felonies (2,0 10 of 53,420 
felony dispositions); and 3.5% of misdemeanors ( 1 , 10 1 of 
31,703 misdemeanor dispositions). Over half (55.5%) of 
all civil dispositions were by voluntary dismissal (8,702 of 
1 5,685 civil dispositions). As in previous years, most crim- 
inal cases were disposed of by guilty plea; 63.4% of all 
felony dispositions (33,882 of 53,420), and 37.0% of all 
misdemenaor dispositions (11,718 of 31,703) were by 
guilty plea, with over 80% of these being to the offense as 
charged. 

The total number of cases disposed of in superior 
courts in 1987-88 was 4,896 cases less than the total 
number of cases filed. Consequently, the total number of 
pending cases in superior courts increased from 42,326 at 
the beginning of the fiscal year to a total at year's end of 
47,222, an increase of 11.6%. 



83 



CASELOAD TRENDS IN THE SUPERIOR COURTS 

1978-79-1987-88 



120 



N 
U 
M 
B 
E 
R 



F 

C 

A 
S 
E 
S 



100 



90 



60 



40 



20 




Dispositions 



End Pending 



78-79 



79-80 80-81 



81-82 



82-83 



83-84 



84-85 85-86 



86-87 87-88 



Following a slower rate of increase in the early 1980's, 
filings and dispositions in superior court appear to have 
resumed the earlier pattern of significant annual increases. 
The 1 1.6% rise in the number of cases pending as of June 



30, 1988 resulted from a 6.9% increase in filings during 
1987-88 coupled with a comparatively smaller 4.7% 
increase in dispositions. 



84 



SUPERIOR COURT CASELOAD 
July 1, 1987 - June 30, 1988 



60 



T 
H 
O 

U 

s 

A 

N 
D 
S 

o 

F 

C 

A 
S 
E 
S 



50 



40 



30 



20 



10 



Begin Pending 
Filings 
Dispositions 
End Pending 



6,756 



15,097 



15,685 1 6 ;1 68 






: :-■:."■■■. 

m 

m 

; : 

£■•:*- v 

pi 



CIVIL 



55,284 



53,420 



18,277 



20,141 









m 

■ ■ ■ 

•vSf'A.* 



FELONIES 



33,664 



31,703 



8,952 



10,913 

WTO 

HI 

11 

wfea 



MISDEMEANORS 



A comparison with last year's figures indicates that super- 
ior court filings increased in all categories during fiscal 
year 1987-88 — felony filings by 8.0%, misdemeanor fil- 
ings by 4.3%, and civil filings 8.7%. Dispositions of civil 
cases and felonies also increased, by 3.4% and 9.3% 



respectively, but dispositions of misdemeanors declined 
by 1 .7%, leaving 47,222 cases pending in superior court on 
June 30, 1988, an 1 1.6% increase over the number pend- 
ing at the beginning of the fiscal year. 



85 



MEDIAN AGES OF SUPERIOR COURT CASES 
Median Ages (in days) of Cases Pending June 30, 1988 



CIVIL 



FELONY 



MISDEMEANOR 




Median Ages (in days) of Cases Disposed During 1987-88 



CIVIL 



FELONY 



MISDEMEANOR 




293.00 



The median age is the age with respect to which half of the 
cases in the category are younger and half are older; it is 
the 50th percentile of ages of all cases in the category. As 
shown in the above graphs, the median ages of all civil 
superior court cases pending and disposed during fiscal 



year 1987-88 are greater than the corresponding median 
ages of criminal superior court cases pending and dis- 
posed. In general, civil cases take longer to process than 
do criminal cases. 



86 



I 

H 
O 

U 

s 

A 

N 
D 

S 



o 

F 



C 

A 
S 
E 
S 



CASELOAD TRENDS OF CIVIL CASES IN THE SUPERIOR COURTS 

1978-79 - 1987-88 



16 



14 



12 



10 



End Pending 




Dispositions 



78-79 79-80 80-81 81-82 82-83 83-84 84-85 85-86 86-87 87- 



During 1987-88, civil filings in the superior courts 
increased by 8.7% while dispositions increased only 3.4%. 
As the graph above shows, these figures are in direct 
contrast with those for 1986-87, when the growth in filings 
temporarily slowed while dispositions sharply increased. 



The rapid growth in filings during 1987-88, accompanied 
by the slower growth in dispositions, resulted in a 7.1% 
increase in the number of cases pending on June 30, 1988 
as compared to the number pending on July 1, 1987. 



87 



FILINGS OF CIVIL CASES IN THE 

SUPERIOR COURTS — BY TYPE OF CASE 

July 1, 1987 - June 30, 1988 



Collection on Account 
(1,171) 



Contract 
(3,969) 



Motor Vehicle 

Negligence 

(5,287) 




Other Negligence 
(2,352) 



Other 

(2,182) 



2.4% Administrative Appeal 
(396) 
Real Property 
(1,399) 



As was the case in recent years, almost half (45.6%) of the 
civil cases filed statewide during 1987-88 were negligence 
sases (7,639 of 16,756 total filings). The "other category 



includes non-negligent torts such as conversion of prop- 
erty, civil fraud, and civil assault. 



CASELOAD INVENTORY FOR CIVIL CASES 
IN THE SUPERIOR COURTS 

July 1, 1987 - June 30, 1988 



District 1 

Camden 

Chowan 

Currl tuck 

Dare 

Gates 

Pasquotank 

Perquimans 

District Totals 275 331 606 279 46.0% 327 

District 2 

Beaufort 33 60 143 75 52.4% 68 

Hyde 18 17 35 14 40.0% 21 

Martin 53 45 98 53 54.1% 45 



Uegin 












End 


Pending 




Total 




% 


Caseload 


Pending 


7/1/87 


Filed 


Caseload 


Disposed 


I 


isposed 


6/30/88 


13 


12 


25 


12 




48.0% 


13 


31 


22 


53 


25 




47.2% 


28 


40 


72 


112 


33 




29.5% 


79 


104 


119 


223 


110 




49.3% 


113 


14 


11 


25 


15 




60.0% 


10 


58 


65 


123 


63 




51.2% 


60 


15 


30 


45 


21 




46.7% 


24 



District 4 




Duplin 


101 


Jones 


20 


Onslow 


335 


Sampson 


70 


District Totals 


526 


District 5 




New Hanover 


435 


Pender 


49 


District Totals 


484 


District 6 




Bertie 


30 


Halifax 


80 


Hertford 


33 


Northampton 


39 


District Totals 


182 


District 7 




Edgecombe 


117 


Nash 


149 


Wilson 


121 



60 


143 


75 


17 


35 


14 


45 


98 


53 





8 


2 


25 


57 


29 



Tyrrell 3 8 2 25.0% 6 

Washington 31 26 57 29 50.9% 28 

District Totals 193 143 341 173 50.7% 168 

District 3 

Carteret 209 

Craven 210 

Pamlico 15 

Pitt 282 

District Totals 716 755 1,471 766 52.1% 705 



209 


413 


200 


246 


4 56 


221 


21 


36 


20 


279 


561 


325 



86 


187 


9 3 


22 


42 


14 


326 


661 


234 


56 


126 


75 



32 


62 


37 


118 


198 


91 


51 


84 


51 


22 


61 


36 



120 


237 


139 


165 


314 


169 


101 


222 


107 



27 


67 


34 


186 


391 


232 


232 


446 


217 



47.3% 


218 


48.5% 


235 


55.6% 


16 


57.9% 


236 



49.7% 


94 


33.3% 


28 


35.4% 


427 


59.5% 


51 



490 1,016 416 40.9% 600 



419 354 385 45.1% 469 

57 106 44 41.5% 62 

476 960 429 44.7% 531 



59.7% 


25 


46.0% 


107 


60.7% 


33 


59.0% 


25 



223 405 215 53.1% 190 



58.6% 


98 


53.8% 


145 


48.2% 


115 



District Totals 387 386 773 415 53.7% 358 

District 8 

Greene 40 

Lenoir 205 

Wayne 214 

District Totals 459 445 904 483 53.4% 421 



50.7% 


33 


59 . 3% 


159 


48.7% 


229 



89 



District 9 



Harne tt 

Johnston 

Lee 

District Totals 



CASELOAD INVENTORY FOR CIVIL CASES 
IN THE SUPERIOR COURTS 

July 1, 1987 - June 30, 1988 



Begin 
Pending 

7/1/87 



Franklin 


76 


Granville 


46 


Person 


56 


Vance 


63 


Warren 


36 


District Totals 


277 


District 10 




Wake 


1,453 


District 11 





12 i 

188 

75 

S8b 





Total 




Filed 


Caseload 


Dispo 


62 


138 


67 


50 


96 


45 


59 


115 


61 


88 


151 


67 


33 


69 


31 


292 


569 


271 



1,632 



150 

20') 
71 

426 



3,085 



1,457 



273 


155 


393 


192 


146 


77 





End 


h Caseload 


Pendin 


Disposed 


6/30/8 


48.6% 


71 


46.9% 


51 


53.07. 


54 


44.4% 


84 


44.9% 


38 



812 



4 24 



47.6% 



47.2% 



56.8% 
48.9% 
52.7% 

52.2% 



298 



1,628 



L18 

201 
69 

388 



District 12 

Cumberland 

Hoke 

District Totals 

District 13 



436 

19 



50 5 



Bladen 




n 


Brunswick 




126 


Columbus 




L60 


District Totals 


308 


District 


14 




Durham 




590 


District 


15A 




Alamance 




L96 


District 


15B 




Chatham 




37 


Orange 




170 



48 2 
16 

498 



57 
98 

101, 

261 



626 



131 



62 

206 



963 
35 

1,003 



1,216 



32 7 



99 

3 7., 



48 3 
17 

500 



VI 


37 


224 


79 


266 


108 


569 


2 24 



595 



172 



65 

2 08 



49.9% 
48.6% 

49.9% 



46.8% 
35.3% 
40.6% 

39.4% 



48.9% 



52.6% 



65.7% 
55.3% 



485 
18 

503 



42 
145 
158 

345 



b21 



1 c < : . 



14 

168 



District Totals 

District 16 

Robeson 

Scotland 



207 



179 
41 



263 



290 
72 



475 



469 
113 



273 



226 
52 



57.5% 



48.2% 
46.0% 



202 



24 i 
61 



District Totals 



220 



362 



58 2 



278 



47.8% 



(0 4 



District 17A 




Caswell 


11 


Rockingham 


38 


District Totals 


99 


District 17B 




Stokes 


20 


Surry 


71 



District Totals 



91 



2 2 
1 1 5 



137 



22 

116 

1 38 



3 3 
203 

236 



42 

187 

2 2') 



14 

101 



115 



28 
114 

142 



42.4% 
49.8% 

48.7% 



66.7% 
61.0% 

62.0% 



19 
102 

121 



14 
73 

87 



90 



CASELOAD INVENTORY FOR CIVIL CASES 
IN THE SUPERIOR COURTS 

July 1, 1987 - June 30, 1988 





Begin 










End 




Pending 




Total 




% Caseload 


Pendin 




7/1/87 


Filed 


Caseload 


Disposed 


Disposed 


6/30/8! 


District 18 














Guilford 


829 


1,178 


2,007 


1,022 


50.9% 


985 


District 19A 














Cabarrus 


130 


157 


287 


139 


48.4% 


148 


Rowan 


152 


176 


5 23 


186 


56 . 7% 


142 


District Totals 


282 


333 


615 


325 


52.8% 


290 


District 19B 














Montgomery 


16 


29 


45 


12 


26.7% 


33 


Randolph 


92 


169 


261 


126 


48.3% 


135 


District Totals 


103 


L98 


306 


138 


45.1% 


168 


District 20 














Anson 


(.fa 


47 


113 


67 


59.3% 


4fa 


Moore 


LOO 


109 


209 


101 


48 . 3% 


108 


Richmond 


91 


83 


174 


96 


55.2% 


78 


Stanly 


80 


73 


158 


61 


38 . 6% 


97 


Union 


163 


L43 


306 


130 


42.5% 


176 


District Totals 


500 


460 


960 


455 


47.4% 


505 


District 21 















Forsyth 

District 22 

Alexander 

Davidson 

Davie 

Iredell 



525 



35 

12b 

28 

162 



722 



27 
169 

45 
200 



1,247 



652 



fa 2 


39 


295 


157 


73 


35 


362 


211 



52.3% 



595 



62.9% 


23 


53.2% 


138 


47.9% 


38 


58 . 3% 


151 



District Totals 



351 



441 



792 



442 



55.8% 



350 



District 23 

Alleghany 

Ashe 

Wilkes 

Yadkin 



15 

13 

125 

40 



14 
27 
157 
43 



29 


16 


40 


18 


282 


140 


33 


49 



55.2% 


13 


45.0% 


2 2 


49.6% 


142 


59.0% 


34 



District Totals 



193 



241 



434 



223 



51.4% 



211 



District 24 



Avery 


52 


Madison 


74 


Mitchell 


22 


Watauga 


9 fa 


Yancey 


2fa 


District Totals 


270 


District 25 




Burke 


145 


Caldwell 


173 


Catawba 


222 


District Totals 


540 


District 26 





55 
25 

27 

10 3 

22 

232 



107 


71 


99 


faO 


49 


20 


199 


109 


48 


29 



502 



289 



Mecklenburg 



2,335 



140 


23 5 


167 


155 


328 


162 


264 


486 


275 


5 59 


1,099 


604 


422 


4,757 


2,157 



66.4% 
60.6% 
40.8% 
54.8% 
60.4% 

57.6% 



55.0% 



45.3% 



3fa 
39 
29 
90 
19 

213 



58.6% 


113 


49.4% 


lbb 


56.6% 


211 



49 5 



2,600 



91 



CASELOAD INVENTORY FOR CIVIL CASES 
IN THE SUPERIOR COURTS 

July 1, 1987 - June 30, 1988 





Begin 












End 




Pending 




Total 




% 


Caseload 


Pendin 




7/1/87 


Filed 


Caseload 


Disposed 


D 


isposed 


6/30/8 


Pisuict in 
















Gaston 


388 


533 


971 


528 




54.4% 


443 


District 27B 
















Cleveland 


117 


134 


251 


124 




49.4% 


127 


Lincoln 


58 


7 2 


130 


69 




53.1% 


61 



District Totals 



175 



206 



38). 



193 



50.7% 



188 



District 29 
Buncombe 



338 



520 



853 



466 



54 . 3% 



392 



District 29 












Henderson 




142 


179 


321 


110 


McDowell 




64 


40 


104 


46 


Polk 




12 


22 


34 


19 


Rutherford 




88 


71 


159 


83 


Transylvania 




7! 


53 


124 


60 


District To 


tals 


377 


365 


742 


318 


District 39 












Cherokee 




29 


21 


50 


24 


Clay 




10 


8 


18 


8 


Graham 




23 


8 


31 


16 


Haywood 




116 


113 


229 


95 


Jackson 




49 


58 


107 


40 


Macon 




31 


44 


125 


47 


Swain 




24 


19 


43 


16 


District Totals 


332 


271 


603 


246 


State Totals 




15,097 


16,756 


31,353 


15,685 



34.3% 


211 


44.2% 


58 


55.9% 


15 


52.2% 


76 


48.4% 


b4 



42.9% 



424 



48.0% 


26 


44.4% 


10 


51.6% 


15 


41.5% 


134 


37.4% 


67 


37.6% 


78 


37.2% 


27 


40.8% 


357 


49.2% 


16,168 



92 



MANNER OF DISPOSITION OF CIVIL CASES 
IN THE SUPERIOR COURTS 

July 1, 1987 - June 30, 1988 



Trial by Judge 
(2,278) 



Voluntary 

Dismissal 

(8,702) 




Trial by Jury (896) 
Other (563) 

Clerk (962) 



Final Order or 

Judgment Without 

Trial (Judge) 

(2,284) 



As in previous years, voluntary dismissals account for the 
largest number of civil case dispositions in superior 
courts. The next largest category, final order or judgment 
without trial, includes summary and consent judgments, 



and orders changing venue. The "other" category includes 
miscellaneous dispositions such as discontinuance for 
lack of service of process under Civil Rule 4(e), dismissal 
on motion of the court, and removal to federal court. 



93 



MANNER OF DISPOSITION OF 

CIVIL CASES IN THE SUPERIOR COURTS 

July 1, 1987 - June 30, 1988 





Trial 


by 


Voluntary 
Dismissal 


Judge's 

Final Order 

or Judgment 

without Trial 


Clerk 


Other 






Jury 


Judge 


Total Dispositions 


District 1 

Camden 

Chowan 

Currituck 

Dare 

Gates 

Pasquotank 

Perquimans 



1 
3 


2 

1 
i 


1 



5 

7 
2 
3 
2 


3 

6 

16 
67 

4 
37 
12 


5 
1 
9 
21 
3 
6 
2 


1 

4 

4 
2 
7 
3 


2 
7 

11 
2 
4 
1 


12 
25 
33 
110 
15 
63 
21 


District Totals 
% of Total 


8 
2.9% 


31 
11.1% 


145 
52.0% 


47 
16.8% 


21 

7.5% 


27 
9.7% 


279 
100.0% 


District 2 

Beaufort 

Hyde 

Martin 

Tyrrell 

Washington 


4 

2 




8 

5 

4 


37 
5 

35 


17 


21 
7 

1U 
2 
8 



1 
1 




5 
1 

i) 




75 

14 

53 

2 


District Totals 
% of Total 


6 
3.5% 


17 
9.8% 


94 
54.3% 


48 
27.7% 


2 
1.2% 


6 
3.5% 


173 
100.0% 


District 3 

Carteret 

Craven 

Pamlico 

Pitt 


14 

9 



22 


37 

20 

2 

71 


114 

121 

9 

198 


22 

42 

4 

20 


10 

[') 

1 

14 


3 
10 
4 



200 

221 

20 

325 


District Totals 
% of Total 


45 
5.9% 


130 
17.0% 


442 
57.7% 


88 
11.5% 


44 
5.7% 


17 
2.2% 


766 
100.0% 


District 4 

Duplin 

Jones 

Onslow 

Sampson 


10 

13 

3 


14 
2 
9 

16 


49 

b 

140 

35 


12 

2 
47 

4 


i 

1 

24 

6 


5 
3 

1 
6 


93 

14 

234 

75 


District Totals 
% of Total 


31 
7.5% 


41 
9.9% 


230 
55.3% 


65 
15.6% 


34 
8.2% 


15 

3.6% 


416 
100.0% 


District 5 
New Hanover 
Pender 


24 
2 


73 

5 


218 

29 


41 
5 


23 

2 


6 

1 


38 5 

44 


District Totals 
% of Total 


26 
6.1% 


78 
18.2% 


247 
57.6% 


46 
10.7% 


25 
5.8% 


7 
1.6% 


429 
100.0% 


District 6 

Bertie 

Halifax 

Hertford 

Northampton 


3 
3 


1 


1 
23 

3 
13 


13 

52 
22 
17 


9 

9 

14 

1 


5 

4 
9 
3 


1 



3 

l 


37 
91 
51 
36 


District Totals 
% of Total 


7 
3.3% 


40 
18.6% 


109 
50.7% 


33 
15.3% 


21 
9.8% 


5 
2.3% 


215 
100.0% 


District 7 
Edgecombe 
Nash 
Uilson 


10 
8 
9 


16 

10 
26 


72 
91 
41 


32 
44 
21 


5 

12 

10 


4 
4 



1 J9 
169 
107 


District Totals 
% of Total 


27 
6.5% 


52 
12.5% 


204 
49.2% 


97 
23.4% 


27 
6.5% 


8 
1.9% 


415 
100.0% 



94 



MANNER OF DISPOSITION OF 
CIVIL CASES IN THE SUPERIOR COURTS 

July 1, 1987 - June 30, 1988 







Trial 


by 


Voluntary 
Dismissal 

15 

137 
133 


Judge's 

Final Order 

or Judgment 

without Trial 

14 

55 
33 


Clerk 



16 

10 


Other 

5 






District 8 
Greene 
Lenoir 
Wayne 




Jury 


12 

12 


Judge 



12 
2y 


Total Dispo 

34 
232 
217 


District To 
% of Total 


tals 


24 
5.0% 


41 
8.5% 


285 
59.0% 


102 
21.1% 


26 
5.4% 


5 

1.0% 


483 
100.0% 


District 9 

Franklin 

Granville 

Person 

Vance 

Warren 




8 
2 
2 
3 

1 


12 
5 

13 

19 

6 


32 

24 
35 

42 
17 


7 

4 
1 

1 
7 




2 
2 



3 

10 

3 





67 
45 
61 
67 
31 


District Totals 
% of Total 


16 
5.9% 


60 
22.1% 


150 
55.4% 


20 
7.4% 


4 
1.5% 


21 

7.7% 


271 
100.0% 


District 10 
Wake 

% of Total 




71 
A. 9% 


136 
12.8% 


716 
49.1% 


304 
20.9% 


134 
9.2% 


46 
3.2% 


1,457 
100.0% 


District 11 
Harnett 
Johnston 
Lee 




9 

11 

11 


20 

32 
5 


89 
90 
4b 


28 
48 
11 


6 

10 

4 


3 

1 



155 

192 
77 


District To 
% of Total 


tals 


31 

7.3% 


57 
13.4% 


225 
53.1% 


87 
20.5% 


20 
4.7% 


4 
0.9% 


424 
100.0% 


District 12 

Cumberland 

Hoke 




lb 

1 


72 
3 


305 
10 


31 




19 
2 


20 
1 


483 
17 


District To 
% of Total 


tals 


17 
3.4% 


75 
15.0% 


315 
63.0% 


51 
10.2% 


21 
4.2% 


21 
4.2% 


500 
100.0% 


District 13 
Bladen 
Brunswick 
Columbus 




k 
11 
11 


2 
18 
19 


20 
33 
67 


7 

13 

6 


1 

4 




3 



5 


37 

79 
108 


District To 
% of Total 


tals 


26 
11.6% 


39 
17.4% 


120 
53.6% 


26 
11.6% 


5 
2.2% 


8 
3.6% 


224 
100.0% 


District 14 
Durham 

% of Total 




32 
5.4% 


35 
5.9% 


341 
57.3% 


110 
18.5% 


33 
5.5% 


44 
7.4% 


595 
100.0% 


District 15A 
Alamance 
% of Total 




5 
2.9% 


18 
10.5% 


99 
57.6% 


44 
25.6% 


5 
2.9% 


1 
0.6% 


172 
100.0% 


District 15B 

Chatham 

Orange 




3 

17 


7 

4 5 


40 
107 


9 
16 


4 
16 


2 

7 


65 

208 


District Tc 
% of Total 


• tals 


20 
7.3% 


52 
19.0% 


147 
53.8% 


25 
9.2% 


20 
7.3% 


9 
3.3% 


273 
100.0% 


District 16 

Robeson 

Scotland 




18 

i 


61 
7 


139 

34 


2 

7 


4 




2 

1 


226 

32 


District Totals 
% of Total 


21 
7.6% 


68 

24 . 5% 


173 
62.2% 


9 
3.2% 


4 
1.4% 


3 
1.1% 


278 
100.0% 



95 



MANNER OF DISPOSITION OF 
CIVIL CASES IN THE SUPERIOR COURTS 

July 1, 1987 - June 30, 1988 







Trial 


by 


Voluntary 
Dismissal 


Judge's 

Final Order 

or Judgment 

without Trial 


Clerk 


Other 








Jury 


Judge 


Total Dispo 


District 17A 

Caswell 

Rockingham 





5 




9 


5 

63 


8 
17 


1 
5 



2 


14 
101 


District To 
% of Total 


tals 


5 
4.3% 


9 
7.8% 


68 
59.1% 


25 
21.7% 


6 
5.2% 


2 

1.7% 


115 
100.0% 


District 17B 

Stokes 

Surry 






6 


3 
8 


11 
61 


6 

32 



7 


8 




28 

114 


District Totals 
% of Total 


6 
4.2% 


11 
7.7% 


72 
50.7% 


38 
26.8% 


7 
4.9% 


8 
5.6% 


142 
100.0% 


District 18 
Guilford 
% of Total 




38 
3.7% 


223 
21.8% 


545 
53.3% 


114 
11.2% 


47 
4.6% 


55 
5.4% 


1,022 

100.0% 


District 19A 

Cabarrus 

Rowan 




3 
23 


18 
5 


91 

104 


19 
41 


3 
4 


5 
9 


139 
186 


District Totals 
% of Total 


26 
8.0% 


23 
7.1% 


195 
60.0% 


60 
18.5% 


7 
2.2% 


14 
4.3% 


325 

100.0% 


District 19B 

Montgomery 

Randolph 




1 

7 


4 
16 


7 
63 




J 4 



9 



7 


12 
126 


District To 
% of Total 


tals 


3 
5.8% 


20 
14.5% 


70 
50.7% 


24 
17.4% 


9 
6.5% 


7 
5.1% 


138 
100.0% 


District 20 

Anson 

Moore 

Richmond 

Stanly 

Union 




11 
4 
2 

8 


10 

32 

21 

9 

2 4 


u, 
58 
62 
38 
88 


6 

3 

6 

L3 

4 


3 
4 
4 





1 


1 
1 




67 

101 

9fa 

61 

130 


District To 
% of Total 


tals 


25 
5.5% 


96 
21.1% 


282 
62.0% 


32 
7.0% 


17 
3.7% 


3 

0.7% 


455 
100.0% 


District 21 
Forsyth 

% of Total 




46 
7.1% 


70 
10.7% 


329 
50 . 5% 


113 
17.3% 


57 
8.7% 


37 
5.7% 


652 
100.0% 


District 22 

Alexander 

Davidson 

Davie 

Iredell 




1 

13 

3 

15 


2 
19 
11 
39 


20 
76 
17 

100 


11 

40 

1 

20 


2 

8 

3 

23 


3 
1 


14 


39 

157 
35 

211 


District To 
% of Total 


tals 


32 
7.2% 


71 
16.1% 


213 
48.2% 


72 
16.3% 


36 
8.1% 


18 
4.1% 


442 
100.0% 


District 23 

Alleghany 

Ashe 

Wilkes 

Yadkin 




1 

5 
4 


3 
3 
L0 

1 


8 
12 

:n 
26 


4 

1 
11 
13 



1 

14 
2 




1 
1 

3 


lb 

18 
140 
49 


District To 
% of Total 


tals 


10 
4.5% 


17 
7.6% 


129 
57.8% 


45 
20.2% 


17 
7.6% 


5 
2.2% 


223 

100.0% 



96 



MANNER OF DISPOSITION OF 
CIVIL CASES IN THE SUPERIOR COURTS 

July 1, 1987 - June 30, 1988 





Trial 


by 


Voluntary 
Dismissal 

32 
25 
15 
60 
13 


Judge's 

Final Order 

or Judgment 

without Trial 

22 

20 

3 

24 

9 


Clerk 

4 


6 



Other 

11 
10 



11 

l 




District 24 

Avery 

Madison 

Mitchell 

Watauga 

Yancey 


Jury 


3 




1 


Judge 

2 
2 
2 
8 
5 


Total Dispo 

71 

60 

20 

109 

29 


District Totals 
% of Total 


4 
1.4% 


19 
6.6% 


145 
50.2% 


78 
27.0% 


10 
3.5% 


33 

11.4% 


289 
100.0% 


District 25 
Burke 
Caldwell 
Catawba 


16 
16 

12 


26 

2 

22 


101 

97 

172 


15 
37 
38 


4 

8 

29 


5 
2 
2 


167 
162 
275 


District Totals 
% of Total 


44 
7.3% 


50 
8.3% 


370 
61.3% 


90 
14.9% 


41 
6.8% 


9 
1.5% 


604 
100.0% 


District 26 
Mecklenburg 
% of Total 


97 
4.5% 


368 
17.1% 


1,308 
60.6% 


172 

8.0% 


173 

8.0% 


39 

1.8% 


2,157 

100.0% 


District 27A 
Gaston 

% of Total 


40 
7.6% 


110 
20.8% 


319 

60.4% 


7 
1.3% 


18 
3.4% 


34 
6.4% 


528 

100.0% 


District 27B 

Cleveland 

Lincoln 


8 
4 


18 

10 


60 
35 


20 
17 


9 

3 


9 



124 
69 


District Totals 
% of Total 


12 
6.2% 


28 
14.5% 


95 
49.2% 


37 
19.2% 


12 
6.2% 


9 
4.7% 


193 
100.0% 


District 28 
Buncombe 
% of Total 


41 
8.8% 


61 
13.1% 


232 

49.8% 


91 
19.5% 


29 

6.2% 


12 
2.6% 


466 
100.0% 


District 29 

Henderson 

McDowell 

Polk 

Rutherford 

Transylvania 


10 

5 
2 

5 
1 


17 
2 


18 

10 


bl 
24 
13 
37 
27 


16 
11 
2 
13 
13 


3 
3 

4 
4 


3 
1 
I 
6 

5 


110 

46 
19 
83 
60 


District Totals 
% of Total 


23 

7.2% 


47 
14.8% 


162 

50.9% 


55 
17.3% 


14 

4.4% 


17 
5.3% 


318 
100.0% 


District 30 

Cherokee 

Clay 

Graham 

Haywood 

Jackson 

Macon 

Swain 


1 
2 

2 

7 
5 
6 

3 


6 

1 
1 
18 
1 
5 
3 


15 

2 

9 

43 

25 

24 

8 


1 
1 
3 
14 
4 
4 
2 



1 

9 
4 
2 



1 
1 
1 
4 
1 
6 



24 
8 

16 
95 
40 
47 
16 


District Totals 
% of Total 


26 
10.6% 


35 
14.2% 


126 

51.2% 


29 
11.8% 


16 
6.5% 


14 
5.7% 


246 
100.0% 


State Totals 
% of Total 


896 
5.7% 


2,278 
14.5% 


8,702 
55.5% 


2,284 
14.6% 


962 

6.1% 


563 
3.6% 


15,685 
100.0% 



97 



AGES OF CIVIL CASES PENDING IN THE SUPERIOR COURTS 

Ages of Cases Pending June 30, 1988 

Ages of Pending Cases (Months) 

















Total 
Pending 


Mean 
Age (Days) 






<12 


% 


12-24 


% 


>24 


% 


Age (Days) 


District 1 




















Camden 


8 


61.5% 


4 


30.8% 


1 


7.7% 


13 


335.4 


288.0 


Chowan 


17 


60.7% 


6 


21.4% 


5 


17.9% 


28 


365.9 


322.0 


Currituck 


64 


81.0% 


11 


13.9% 


4 


5.1% 


79 


240.2 


140.0 


Dare 


76 


67.3% 


29 


25.7% 


8 


7.1% 


113 


300.0 


209.0 


Gates 


9 


90.0% 





0.0% 


1 


10.0% 


10 


269.8 


128.0 


Pasquotank 


42 


70.0% 


10 


16.7% 


8 


13.3% 


60 


361.5 


244.5 


Perquimans 


21 


37.5% 


2 


8.3% 


1 


4.2% 


24 


178.8 


36.5 



District Totals 



237 



72.5% 



62 



19.0% 



28 



8.6% 



327 



294.1 



199.0 



District 2 

Beaufort 

Hyde 

Martin 

Tyrrell 

Washington 



40 


58.8% 


11 


16.2% 


17 


25.0% 


68 


475.1 


292.5 


13 


61.9% 


3 


14.3% 


5 


23.8% 


21 


546.0 


300.0 


28 


62.2% 


7 


15.6% 


10 


22.2% 


45 


477.5 


281.0 





0.0% 


2 


33.3% 


4 


66.7% 


6 


1,018.3 


1,031.5 


17 


60.7% 


4 


14.3% 


7 


25.0% 


28 


383.1 


259.0 



District Totals 



98 



58.3% 



2/ 



16.1% 



43 



25.6% 



168 



488.7 



295.0 



District 3 



Carteret 




148 


67.9% 


51 


23.4% 


19 


8.7% 


218 


316.4 


260.0 


Craven 




166 


70.6% 


52 


22.1% 


17 


7.2% 


235 


288.9 


218.0 


Pamlico 




12 


75.0% 


4 


25.0% 





0.0% 


16 


256.2 


251.5 


Pitt 




154 


65.3% 


57 


24.2% 


25 


10.6% 


236 


354.9 


225.0 


District 


Totals 


480 


68.1% 


164 


23.3% 


61 


3.7% 


70 5 


318.8 


237.0 


District 4 























Duplin 
Jones 
Onslow 
Sampson 



56 


59.6% 


24 


25.5% 


14 


14.9% 


17 


60.7% 


4 


14.3% 


7 


25.0% 


256 


60.0% 


111 


26.0% 


60 


14.1% 


33 


64.7% 


12 


23.5% 


6 


11.8% 



94 

28 

427 

51 



365.1 
685.5 
394.6 
354.5 



273.5 
264.0 
275.0 
246.0 



District Totals 



362 



60.3% 



151 



25.2% 



37 



14. 5% 



600 



400.1 



266.0 



District 5 
New Hanover 
Pender 



310 


66.1% 


120 


25.6% 


39 


39 


62.9% 


18 


29.0% 


5 



8.3% 
8.1% 



469 

62 



311.8 
294.9 



259.0 
250.0 



District Totals 



349 



65.7% 



138 



26.0% 



44 



3.3% 



531 



309.8 



259.0 



District 6 



Bertie 




16 


64.0% 


7 


28.0% 


2 


8.0% 


25 


347.6 


288.0 


Halifax 




86 


80 . 4% 


15 


14.0% 


6 


5.6% 


107 


251.3 


182.0 


Hertford 




29 


87.9% 





0.0% 


4 


12.1% 


33 


262.1 


108.0 


Northampton 




10 


40.0% 


8 


32.0% 


7 


28.0% 


2 5 


547.8 


415.0 


District 


Totals 


141 


74.2% 


io 


15.8% 


19 


10.0% 


HO 


304.9 


195.5 


District 7 























Edgecombe 

Nash 

Wilson 



70 


71.4% 


97 


66.9% 


7 3 


63.5% 



23 


23.5% 


5 


32 


22.1% 


16 


25 


21.7% 


17 



5.1% 
11.0% 
14.8% 



98 
145 
115 



263.8 
350.3 
311.7 



204.0 
268.0 
209.0 



District Totals 



240 



67.0% 



80 



22.3% 



38 



10.6% 



3 58 



315.6 



219.5 



District 8 
Greene 
Lenoir 
Wayne 



18 


54.5% 


6 


18.2% 


9 


27.3% 


33 


469.6 


328.0 


106 


66.7% 


41 


25.8% 


12 


7.5% 


159 


321.6 


234.0 


159 


69.4% 


49 


21.4% 


21 


9.2% 


229 


294.5 


223.0 



District Totals 



233 



67.2% 



96 



22.8% 



42 



10.0% 



421 



318.5 



237.0 



98 



AGES OF CIVIL CASES PENDING IN THE SUPERIOR COURTS 

Ages of Cases Pending June 30, 1988 

Ages of Pending Cases (Months) 

















Total 
Pending 


Mean 
Age (Days) 


Median 




<12 


% 


12-24 


% 


>24 


% 


Age (Days) 


District 9 




















Franklin 


47 


66.2% 


20 


28.2% 


A 


5.6% 


71 


290.0 


244.0 


Granville 


35 


68 . 6% 


13 


25.5% 


3 


5.9% 


51 


271.4 


160.0 


Person 


37 


68.5% 


1A 


25.9% 


3 


5.6% 


5A 


304.0 


215.5 


Vance 


62 


73.8% 


20 


23.8% 


2 


2.A% 


84 


270.8 


251.0 


Warren 


27 


71.1% 


5 


13.2% 


6 


15.8% 


38 


377.5 


236.0 



District Totals 



208 



69.8% 



72 



24.2% 



18 



6.0% 



298 



295.1 



230.0 



District 


10 


Wake 




District 


11 



Harnett 

Johnston 

Lee 

District Totals 



1,115 



271 



63.5% 



69.8% 



422 



25.9% 



91 



5.6% 



1,628 



106 



27.3% 



11 



2.8% 



388 



294.9 



260.5 



227.0 



89 


75.4% 


27 


22.9% 


2 


1.7% 


118 


231.5 


194.0 


33 


66.2% 


61 


30.3% 


7 


3.5% 


201 


274.4 


252.0 


49 


71.0% 


18 


26.1% 


2 


2.9% 


69 


269.6 


206.0 



207.5 



District 12 



Cumberland 


313 


64.5% 


134 


27.6% 


38 


7.8% 


485 


321.0 


255.0 


Hoke 


11 


61.1% 


6 


33.3% 


1 


5.6% 


18 


365.0 


234.0 


District Totals 


324 


64.4% 


140 


27.8% 


39 


7.3% 


503 


322.6 


255.0 


District 13 





















Bladen 

Brunswick 

Columbus 



40 


95.2% 


2 


4.8% 





0.0% 


82 


56 . 6% 


Al 


28.3% 


22 


15.2% 


79 


50.0% 


53 


33.5% 


26 


16.5% 



42 
145 
158 



148.8 
399.1 
398.9 



120.5 
318.0 
363.5 



District Totals 
District 14 



Durham 




District 


15A 


Alamance 




District 


15B 



Chatham 
Orange 

District Totals 

District 16 



201 



417 



91 



32 
137 



169 



58.3% 



67.1% 



58.7% 



94.1% 
81.5% 

83.7% 



96 



136 



55 



2 
30 

32 



27.8% 



21.9% 



35.5% 



5.9% 
17.9% 

15.8% 



48 



68 



13.9% 



11.0% 



5.8% 



0.0% 
0.6% 

0.5% 



345 



621 



155 



34 
168 

202 



Stokes 13 92.9% 

Surry 65 89.0% 

District Totals 78 89.7% 



7.1% 
11.0% 

10.3% 



0.0% 
0.0% 

0.0% 



14 
73 



87 



368.6 



331.3 



314.1 



163.5 
211.4 

203.3 



185.8 
171.3 

173.6 



293.0 



206.0 



289.0 



154.5 
199.5 

187.5 



Robeson 


200 


82.3% 


39 


16.0% 


4 


1.6% 


243 


227.8 


192.0 


Scotland 


48 


78.7% 


10 


16.4% 


3 


4.9% 


61 


267.4 


199.0 


District Totals 


248 


81.6% 


49 


16.1% 


7 


2.3% 


304 


235.8 


195.5 


District 17A 




















Caswell 


16 


84.2% 


2 


10.5% 


1 


5.3% 


19 


229.9 


224.0 


Rockingham 


83 


81.4% 


15 


14.7% 


4 


3.9% 


102 


227.4 


199.5 


District Totals 


99 


81.8% 


17 


14.0% 


5 


4.1% 


121 


227.8 


220.0 


District 17B 





















145.0 
146.0 

146.0 



99 



AGES OF CIVIL CASES PENDING IN THE SUPERIOR COURTS 

Ages of Cases Pending June 30, 1988 

Ages of Pending Cases (Months) 

















Total 
Pending 


Mean 
Age (Days) 


Median 


District 18 


<12 


% 


12-24 


% 


>24 


% 


Age (Days) 


Guilford 


837 


85.0% 


127 


12.9% 


21 


2.1% 


985 


209.2 


155.0 


District 19A 




















Cabarrus 


114 


77. OX 


26 


18.9% 


6 


4.1% 


148 


228.3 


192.0 


Rowan 


122 


85.9% 


18 


12.7% 


2 


1.4% 


142 


193.1 


153.0 


District Totals 


236 


81.4% 


46 


15.9% 


8 


2.8% 


290 


211. i 


160.5 


Plstrict *9B 




















Montgomery 


26 


78.8% 


6 


18.2% 


1 


3.0% 


33 


210.8 


129.0 


Randolph 


121 


89.6% 


11 


8.1% 


3 


2.2% 


135 


197.3 


162.0 


District Totals 


147 


87.5% 


17 


10.1% 


4 


2.4% 


168 


199.9 


160.0 


District 20 




















Anson 


3U 


65.2% 


15 


32.6% 


1 


2.2% 


46 


274.2 


235.5 


Moore 


76 


70.4% 


19 


17.6% 


13 


12.0% 


108 


322.0 


237.5 


Richmond 


57 


73.1% 


17 


21.8% 


4 


5.1% 


78 


304.3 


233.5 


Stanly 


55 


56.7% 


20 


20.6% 


22 


22.7% 


97 


569.0 


289.0 


Union 


110 


62.5% 


53 


30.1% 


13 


7.4% 


176 


337.0 


244.5 


District Totals 


328 


65.0% 


124 


24 . 6% 


53 


10.5% 


5U5 


367.6 


241.0 


District 21 




















Forsyth 


490 


82.4% 


102 


17.1% 


3 


0.5% 


595 


220.6 


168.0 


District 22 




















Alexander 


20 


87.0% 


3 


13.0% 





0.0% 


23 


171.9 


156.0 


Davidson 


120 


87.0% 


14 


10.1% 


4 


2.9% 


138 


215.5 


168.5 


Davie 


32 


84.2% 


5 


13.2% 


1 


2.6% 


38 


210.5 


136.5 


Iredell 


125 


82.8% 


23 


15.2% 


3 


2.0% 


151 


223.4 


167.0 


District Totals 


297 


34.9% 


45 


12.9% 


8 


2.3% 


350 


215.5 


165.0 


District 23 




















Alleghany 


8 


61.5% 


5 


38.5% 





0.0% 


13 


236.2 


184.0 


Ashe 


18 


81.8% 


4 


18.2% 





0.0% 


22 


255.4 


257.5 


Wilkes 


108 


76.1% 


31 


21.8% 


3 


2.1% 


142 


234.6 


184.0 


Yadkin 


23 


67.6% 


11 


32 4% 





0.0% 


34 


270.8 


207.0 


District Totals 


157 


74.4% 


51 


24.2% 


3 


1.4% 


211 


242.7 


197.0 


District 24 




















Avery 


29 


80.6% 


6 


16.7% 


1 


2.8% 


36 


229.1 


166.5 


Madison 


18 


46 . 2% 


11 


28.2% 


10 


25.6% 


39 


468.6 


407.0 


Mitchell 


22 


75.9% 


4 


13.8% 


3 


10.3% 


29 


297.4 


254.0 


Watauga 


75 


83.3% 


15 


16.7% 





0.0% 


90 


215.4 


189.5 


Yancey 


13 


68.4% 


6 


31.6% 





0.0% 


19 


261.5 


195.0 


District Totals 


157 


7 3.7% 


42 


19.7% 


14 


6.6% 


213 


279.4 


246.0 


District 25 




















Burke 


86 


72.9% 


29 


24.6% 


3 


2.5% 


118 


244.2 


212.0 


Caldwell 


118 


71.1% 


41 


24.7% 


7 


4.2% 


166 


290.1 


238.0 


Catawba 


165 


78.2% 


35 


16.6% 


11 


5.2% 


211 


227.3 


150.0 


District Totals 


369 


74.5% 


105 


21.2% 


21 


4.2% 


495 


252.4 


190.0 


District 26 




















Mecklenburg 


1,763 


67.8% 


668 


25.7% 


169 


6.5% 


2,600 


323.5 


259.0 



100 



AGES OF CIVIL CASES PENDING IN THE SUPERIOR COURTS 

Ages of Cases Pending June 30, 1988 



District 27A 
Gascon 



<12 
368 



Ages of Pending discs (Months) 



% 
33. 1% 



12-24 

65 



% >24 

14.7% 10 



% 
2.3% 



Tulul 
Pending 

443 



Main Mvdiun 

Age (Duys) Age (Days) 



209.3 



147.0 



District 27B 

Cleveland 94 74. OX 25 19.7? 6 6.3% 

Lincoln SI 83.6% 7 11.5% 3 4.9% 

District Totals 145 77.1% 32 17.0% 11 5.9% 

Buncombe 330 84.2% 45 11.5% 17 4.3% 



127 

61 

188 



392 



263.3 
206.5 

244.8 



216.8 



192.0 
155.0 

169.0 
147.0 



District 29 














Henderson 


150 


71.1% 


45 


21.3% 


16 


7.6% 


McDowell 


35 


60.3% 


16 


27.6% 


7 


12.1% 


Polk 


10 


66.7% 


3 


20.0% 


2 


13.3% 


Rutherford 


43 


56.6% 


23 


30.3% 


10 


13.2% 


Transylvania 


38 


59.4% 


17 


26.6% 


9 


14.1% 


District Totals 


276 


65.1% 


104 


24.5% 


44 


10.4% 


District 30 














Cherokee 


15 


57.7% 


7 


26.9% 


4 


15.4% 


Clay 


6 


60.0% 


4 


40.0% 





0.0% 


Graham 


5 


33.3% 


7 


46.7% 


3 


20.0% 


Haywood 


87 


64.9% 


24 


17.9% 


23 


17.2% 


Jackson 


40 


59.7% 


19 


28.4% 


8 


11.9% 


Macon 


34 


43.6% 


22 


28.2% 


22 


28.2% 


Swain 


16 


59.3% 


8 


29.6% 


3 


11.1% 


District Totals 


203 


56.9% 


91 


25.5% 


63 


17.6% 


State Totals 


11,514 


71.2% 


3546 


21.9% 


1108 


6.9% 



211 
58 
15 
76 
64 

424 



26 
10 
15 
134 
67 
78 
27 

357 

16168 



291.1 
330.7 
341.6 
367.6 
371.8 

324.2 



427.5 



294.7 



141.0 
253.0 
240.0 
315.5 
283.0 

228.0 



410.2 


204.5 


350.2 


364.0 


486.7 


559.0 


383.0 


244.0 


354.5 


246.0 


583.0 


453.5 


393.1 


304.0 



304.0 



219.0 



101 



AGES OF CIVIL CASES DISPOSED IN THE SUPERIOR COURTS 

Ages of Cases Disposed July 1, 1987 to June 30, 1988 

Ages or Disposed Cases (Months) 



District 1 

Camden 

Chowan 

Currituck 

Dare 

Gates 

Pasquotank 

Perquimans 



District Totals 159 















Total 
Disposed 


Mean 
Age (Days) 


Median 


<12 


% 


12-24 


% 


>24 


% 


Age (Days) 


6 


50.02 


5 


41.72 


1 


8.32 


12 


366.0 


362.5 


6 


24.0% 


11 


44.02 


8 


32.02 


25 


644.1 


572.0 


20 


60.62 


9 


27.32 


4 


12.1% 


33 


388.4 


265.0 


69 


62.72 


23 


20.92 


18 


16.4% 


110 


387.1 


230.5 


7 


46.72 


5 


33.32 


3 


20.0% 


15 


524.1 


377.0 


37 


58.72 


15 


23.82 


11 


17.5% 


63 


381.8 


284.0 


14 


66.72 


6 


28.62 


1 


4.8% 


21 


309.1 


224.0 



57.02 



74 



26.52 



46 



16.5% 



279 



409.7 



287.0 



District 2 

Beaufort 45 60.02 18 24.0% 12 16.0% 75 

Hyde 6 42.92 4 28.6% 4 23.6% 14 

Martin 28 52.82 18 34.02 7 13.22 53 

Tyrrell 0.02 0.02 2 100.0% 2 

Washington 15 51.72 6 20.72 8 27.6% 29 

District Totals 94 54.32 46 26.62 33 19.1% 173 



39 7.1 


300.0 


636.1 


495.5 


430.4 


310.0 


1,244.5 


1,244.5 


420.2 


302.0 



440.3 



329.0 



District 3 

Carteret 

Craven 

Pamlico 

Pitt 



109 

138 

15 

222 



54.52 
62.42 
75.0% 
68.3% 



67 

60 

1 

87 



33.5% 

27.1% 

5.0% 

26.8% 



24 

23 

4 

16 



12.0% 

10.4% 

20.0% 

4.9% 



200 

221 

20 

325 



364.8 
354.3 
484.8 
231.1 



319.5 
257.0 
264.0 
222.0 



District Totals 

District 4 

Duplin 

Jones 

Onslow 

Sampson 



484 



52 

10 

123 

51 



District Totals 236 



63.2% 



55.92 
71.42 
52.62 
68.02 

56.72 



215 



30 
2 

78 
16 

126 



28.1% 



32.3% 
14.32 
33.32 
21.32 

30.32 



67 



11 

2 
33 

8 

54 



8.7% 



11.8% 
14.3% 
14.1% 
10.7% 

13.0% 



766 



93 

14 

234 

75 

416 



329.4 



399.3 
282.9 
417.3 
312.8 

389.9 



259.5 



315.0 
249.5 
348.0 
251.0 



302.5 



District 5 
New Hanover 
Pender 



221 

29 



57.42 
65.92 



100 

7 



26.02 
15.92 



64 
8 



16.6% 
18.2% 



38 5 
44 



376.7 
348.1 



318.0 
249.5 



District Totals 250 



58.3% 



107 



24.92 



72 



16.3% 



429 



373.8 



310.0 



District 6 

Bertie 

Halifax 

Hertford 

Northampton 

District Totals 

District 7 
Edgecombe 
Nash 
Wilson 



27 
55 

28 
18 

128 



90 

113 

56 



73.02 
60.42 
54.92 
50.02 

59.52 



64.72 
66.92 
52.32 



9 
29 
14 
13 

65 



36 
46 
37 



24.32 
31.92 
27.52 
36.12 

30.22 



25.92 
27.22 
34.62 



1 
7 
9 
5 

22 



13 
10 
14 



2.7% 

7.7% 

17.6% 

13.9% 

10.2% 



9.42 

5.9% 

13.1% 



37 
91 
51 
36 

215 



139 
169 
107 



288.0 
325.4 
426.4 
437.7 

361.7 



307.9 
293.3 

422.7 



284.0 
292.0 
342.0 
363.0 

306.0 



234.0 
228.0 
354.0 



District Totals 259 



62.42 



119 



28.72 



37 



8.9% 



415 



331.6 



263.0 



District 8 
Greene 
Lenoir 
Wayne 



15 
129 

134 



District Totals 278 



44.12 
55.62 
61.82 

57.62 



15 
81 
65 

161 



44.12 
34.92 
30.0% 

33.32 



4 
22 
18 

44 



11.82 
9.52 
8.32 

9.1% 



34 
232 
217 

483 



405.8 
358.6 
342.6 

354.8 



414.5 
328.0 
285.0 

311.0 



102 



AGES OF CIVIL CASES DISPOSED IN THE SUPERIOR COURTS 

Ages of Cases Disposed July 1, 1987 to June 30, 1988 

Ages of Disposed Cases (Months) 



District 9 

Franklin 

Granville 

Person 

Vance 

Warren 















Total 
Disposed 


Mean 
Age (Days) 


Median 


<12 


% 


12-24 


% 


>24 


% 


Age (Days) 


24 


35.3% 


33 


49.3% 


10 


14.9% 


67 


425.1 


440.0 


27 


60. OX 


10 


22.2% 


8 


17.8% 


45 


405.2 


308.0 


Al 


67.2% 


16 


26.2% 


4 


6.6% 


61 


291.6 


254.0 


42 


62.7% 


19 


28.4% 


6 


9.0% 


67 


324.4 


253.0 


17 


54.3% 


9 


29.0% 


5 


16.1% 


31 


434.5 


310.0 



District Totals 151 



55.7% 



87 



32.1% 



33 



12.2% 



271 



367.9 



308.0 



District 10 
Wake 



823 



56.5% 



479 



32.9% 



155 



10. 6 V , 



1,457 



361.2 



305.0 



District 11 



Harnett 


107 


69.0% 


40 


25.8% 


8 


5.2% 


Johnston 


121 


63.0% 


60 


31.3% 


11 


5.7% 


Lee 


50 


64.9% 


20 


26.0% 


7 


9.U 


District Totals 


278 


65.6% 


120 


28 . 3% 


26 


6.1% 


District 12 














Cumberland 


262 


54.2% 


144 


29.8% 


77 


15.9% 


Hoke 


7 


41.2% 


7 


41.2% 


3 


17.6% 


District Totals 


269 


53.8% 


151 


30.2% 


30 


16.0% 


District 13 














Bladen 


32 


86.5% 


4 


10.8% 


1 


2.7% 


Brunswick 


34 


43.0% 


31 


39.2% 


14 


17.7% 


Columbus 


44 


40.7% 


31 


28.7% 


33 


30.6% 



155 
192 

77 

424 



483 
17 

500 



37 

79 

108 



281.2 
302.9 
347.0 

303.0 



413.3 
496.2 

416.2 



207.3 
482.9 
524.3 



238.0 
223.5 
301.0 

244.0 



323.0 
366.0 

324.0 



201.0 
403.0 
468.5 



District Totals 110 



District 14 
Durham 



355 



49.1% 



59 . 7% 



6b 



162 



29.5% 



27.2% 



48 



78 



21.4% 



13.1% 



224 



595 



457.4 
364.3 



373.5 



292.0 



District 15A 
Alamance 



70 



40.7% 



55 



32.0% 



47 



27.3% 



172 



562.0 



430.5 



District 15B 




















Chatham 


45 


69.2% 


20 


30.8% 





0.0% 


65 


289.1 


242.0 


Orange 


135 


64.9% 


70 


33.7% 


3 


1.4% 


.208 


291.9 


263.0 


District Totals 


180 


65.9% 


90 


33.0% 


3 


1.1% 


273 


291.2 


263.0 


District 16 




















Robeson 


143 


63.3% 


74 


32.7% 


9 


4.0% 


226 


291.1 


266.0 


Scotland 


37 


71.2% 


14 


26.9% 


1 


1.9% 


52 


260.8 


197.0 



District Totals 180 



64.7% 



88 



31.7% 



10 



3.6% 



278 



285.4 



257.5 



District 17A 



Caswell 


10 


71.4% 


4 


28.6% 





0.0% 


14 


239.4 


210.0 


Rockingham 


70 


69.3% 


28 


27.7% 


3 


3.0% 


101 


292.4 


244.0 


District Totals 


80 


69.6% 


32 


27.8% 


3 


2.6% 


115 


286.0 


244.0 


District 17B 





















Stokes 
Surry 



21 

99 



District Totals 120 



75.0% 
86.3% 

84.5% 



7 
15 

22 



25.0% 
13.2% 

15.5% 



0.0% 
0.0% 

0.0% 



28 
114 

142 



244.0 
215.3 

221.0 



227.5 
201.0 

211.5 



103 



AGES OF CIVIL CASES DISPOSED IN THE SUPERIOR COURTS 

Ages of Cases Disposed July 1, 1987 to June 30, 1988 

Ages of Disposed Cases (Months) 

Total Mean Median 

Disposed Age (Days) Age (Days) 





<12 




» 


12-24 




% 


>24 


i 


& 


District 18 




















Guilford 


648 


63 


4% 


326 


31 


9% 


43 


4 


n 


District 19A 




















Cabarrus 


100 


71 


.9? 


31 


22 


,3X 


8 


5 


8% 


Rowan 


111 


59 


731 


66 


35 


5% 


9 


4 


3% 


District Totals 


211 


64 


9% 


97 


29 


6% 


17 


5 


2% 


District 19B 




















Montgomery 


6 


50 


0% 


6 


50 


.0% 








01 


Randolph 


85 


67 


5% 


31 


24 


.6% 


10 


7 


9% 


District Totals 


91 


65 


.97. 


37 


26 


8% 


10 


7 


2X 


District 20 




















Anson 


35 


52 


.IX 


24 


35 


SX 


8 


11 


.9% 


Moore 


52 


51 


.5% 


34 


33 


JX 


15 


14 


.9% 


Richmond 


43 


44 


8% 


44 


45 


8% 


9 


9 


.4% 


Stanly 


39 


63 


9% 


15 


24 


,6% 


7 


11 


.5% 


Union 


62 


47 


JX 


52 


40 


.OX 


16 


12 


U 



District Totals 231 



50.8% 



169 



37.12 



55 



12. U 



1,022 



139 
186 

325 



12 
126 

138 



67 

101 

96 

61 

130 

455 



313.1 



292.2 
319.6 

307.9 



316.4 
299.8 

301.3 



387.1 
397.0 
392.7 
355.2 
404.3 

391.1 



280.0 



259.0 
315.5 

293.0 



312.0 
274.5 

274.5 



345.0 
344.0 
383.5 
258.0 
387.0 

357.0 



District 21 
Forsyth 



468 



71.3% 



179 



27.5% 



0.8% 



652 



269.4 



257.0 



District 22 



Alexander 


23 


59.0% 


14 


35.9% 


2 


5.1% 


39 


347.3 


335.0 


Davidson 


106 


67.5% 


46 


29.3% 


5 


3.2% 


157 


287.9 


279.0 


Davie 


23 


65.7% 


12 


34.3% 





0.0% 


35 


253.7 


281.0 


Iredell 


133 


63.0% 


68 


32.2% 


10 


4.7% 


211 


313.0 


314.0 



District Totals 285 

District 23 

Alleghany 8 

Ashe 13 

Wilkes 84 

Yadkin 38 

District Totals 143 

District 24 



64.5% 



50.0% 
72.2% 
60.0% 
77.6% 

64.1% 



140 



7 

4 

47 

6 

64 



31.7% 



43.8% 
22.2% 
33.6% 
12.2% 

28.7% 



17 



1 
1 
9 
5 

16 



3.8% 



6.3% 

5.6% 

6.4% 

10.2% 

7.2% 



442 



16 

18 

140 

49 

223 



302.4 



369.6 
245.0 
335.7 
309.1 

324.9 



302.0 



345.5 
240.0 
318.0 
267.0 

287.0 



Avery 


46 


64.8% 


23 


32.4% 


2 


2.3% 


71 


325.8 


301.0 


Madison 


16 


26.7% 


19 


31.7% 


25 


41.7% 


60 


632.3 


647.5 


Mitchell 


9 


45.0% 


9 


45.0% 


2 


10.0% 


20 


414.3 


432.5 


Watauga 


66 


60.6% 


41 


37.6% 


2 


1.8% 


109 


299.8 


281.0 


Yancey 


15 


51.7% 


12 


41.4% 


2 


6.9% 


29 


344.7 


355.0 


District Totals 


152 


52.6% 


104 


36.0% 


33 


11.4% 


289 


387.6 


352.0 


District 25 




















Burke 


114 


68.3% 


46 


27.5% 


7 


4.2% 


167 


308.9 


291.0 


Caldwell 


83 


51.2% 


65 


40.1% 


14 


8.6% 


162 


375.3 


364.0 


Catawba 


194 


70.5% 


76 


27.6% 


5 


1.8% 


275 


276.2 


267.0 


District Totals 


391 


64.7% 


187 


31.0% 


26 


4.3% 


604 


311.8 


301.0 


District 26 




















Mecklenburg 1 


,144 


53.0% 


884 


41.0% 


129 


6.0% 


2,157 


364.8 


335.0 



104 



AGES OF CIVIL CASES DISPOSED IN THE SUPERIOR COURTS 

Ages of Cases Disposed July 1, 1987 to June 30, 1988 

Arcs of Disposed Cases (Months) 



Total Mean Median 

<12 % 12-24 % >24 % Disposed A(jc (Days) Ai;e (Days) 
District 27A 

Gaston 402 76.1% 112 21.2% 14 2.7% 528 257.0 241.0 

District 27B 

Cleveland 71 57.3% 52 41.9% 1 0.8% 124 303.2 304.5 

Lincoln 42 60.9% 24 34.8% 3 4.3% 69 321.6 314.0 

Dlstclct Totals 113 58.5% 76 39.4% 4 2.1% 193 309.8 313.0 

District 28 

Buncombe 350 75.1% 100 21.5% 16 3.4% 466 260.7 231.5 

District 29 

Henderson 61 55.5% 35 31.3% 14 12.7% 110 393.6 316.5 

McDowell 13 28.3% 24 52.2% 9 19.6% 46 523.2 531.5 

Polk 17 89.5% 1 5.3% 1 5.3% 19 276.6 185.0 

Rutherford 42 50.6% 20 24.1% 21 25.3% 83 435.7 359.0 

Transylvania 24 40.0% 24 40.0% 12 20.0% 60 485.9 480.5 

District Totals 157 49.4% 104 32.7% 57 17.9% 318 433.8 371.5 

District 30 

Cherokee 10 41.7% 10 41.7% 4 16.7% 24 434.6 466.5 

Clay 2 25.0% 4 50.0% 2 25.0% 8 535.4 635.0 

Graham 8 50.0% 6 37.5% 2 12.5% 16 450.6 331.5 

Haywood 43 45.3% 42 44.2% 10 10.5% 95 405.3 412.0 

Jackson 24 60.0% 11 27.5% 5 12.5% 40 445.1 193.5 

Macon 20 42.6% 18 38.3% 9 19.1% 47 461.9 443.0 



10 


41.7% 


10 


41.7% 


4 


16.7% 


24 


2 


25.0% 


4 


50.0% 


2 


25.0% 


8 


8 


50.0% 


6 


37.5% 


2 


12.5% 


16 


43 


45.3% 


42 


44.2% 


10 


10.5% 


95 


24 


60.0% 


11 


27.5% 


5 


12.5% 


40 


20 


42.6% 


18 


38.3% 


9 


19.1% 


47 


6 


37.5% 


8 


50.0% 


2 


12.5% 


16 


13 


45.9% 


99 


40.2% 


34 


13.8% 


246 


03 


59.9% 


4,943 


31.5% 


1,339 


8.5% 


15,685 



Swain 6 37.5% 8 50.0% 2 12.5% 16 482.3 436.0 

District Totals 113 45.9% 99 40.2% 34 13.8% 246 437.7 415.0 

State Totals 9,403 59.9% 4,943 31.5% 1,339 8.5% 15,685 345.9 293.0 



105 



CASELOAD TRENDS IN ESTATES AND SPECIAL PROCEEDINGS 

1978-79 - 1987-88 
ESTATE CASES 



T 

H 

O 

u 
s 

A 
N 
D 
S 

O 
F 

C 

A 
S 
E 
S 




78-79 79-80 



80-81 



81-82 82-83 83-84 84-85 



85-86 86-87 



87-88 



SPECIAL PROCEEDING CASES 



T 
H 

O 

u 

s 

A 
N 
D 
S 

O 
F 

C 

A 
S 
E 
S 




78-79 79-80 80-81 81-82 82-83 83-84 84-85 



85-86 



86-87 



87-88 



Following th.e general trend of the last decade, filings of 
estate and special proceedings increased. During 1987-88, 
estate filings increased by 4.0% and estate dispositions by 



2.9%; special proceeding filings increased by 6.6% while 
dispositions of these cases increased by 17.5%. 



106 



FILINGS AND DISPOSITIONS FOR ESTATES 

AND SPECIAL PROCEEDINGS BEFORE THE CLERKS 

OF SUPERIOR COURT 

July 1, 1987 - June 30, 1988 

Estates Special Proceedings 



District 1 



Camden 




C h ow a n 




Currituck 




Dare 




Gates 




Pasquotank 




Perquimans 




District 


Totals 


District 2 




Beaufort 




Hyde 




Martin 




Tyrrell 




Washington 




District 


Totals 


District 3 




Carteret 




Craven 




Pamlico 




Pitt 




District 


Totals 


District 4 




Duplin 




Jones 




Onslow 




Sampson 




District 


Totals 


District 5 





Filed 


Disposed 


66 


69 


171 


148 


171 


159 


209 


2 38 


73 


60 


332 


298 


104 


75 



43A 


352 


73 


67 


212 


242 


33 


37 


115 


L13 



A30 


465 


ASA 


416 


74 


59 


653 


690 



363 


326 


89 


86 


A57 


307 


A31 


A21 



157 


L54 


A9A 


A65 


192 


184 


206 


203 



A71 


A77 


501 


50 2 


512 


50 2 



139 


106 


514 


487 


731 


7 28 



Filed 


Disposed 


(2 


24 


7 8 


50 


95 


59 


139 


135 


47 


21 


135 


81 


48 


33 



1,126 1,047 574 A03 



260 


A03 


30 


2 6 


107 


66 


26 


L2 


47 


70 



367 811 A70 577 



3A3 


183 


519 


A62 


32 


27 


579 


50 7 



1,611 1,630 1.A73 1,179 



307 


198 


51 


A7 


1,165 


8A6 


369 


268 



10A 


59 


318 


27A 


120 


110 


107 


80 



1.3A0 1,140 1,892 1,359 

New Hanover 792 627 1,223 1,125 

Pender 163 16A 135 117 

District Totals 955 791 1,358 1,2A2 

District 6 

Bertie 

Halifax 

Hertford 

Northampton 

District Totals 1,059 1,006 6A9 523 

District 7 
Edgecombe 
Nash 
Wilson 

District Totals 1.A8A 1,481 1,140 831 

District 8 
Greene 
Lenoir 
Wayne 

District Totals 1,384 1,321 1,282 1,248 



301 


253 


465 


272 


374 


306 



8 7 


34 


350 


381 


845 


833 



107 



FILINGS AND DISPOSITIONS FOR ESTATES 

AND SPECIAL PROCEEDINGS BEFORE THE CLERKS 

OF SUPERIOR COURT 



District 9 



Franklin 




Granville 




Person 




Vance 




Warren 




District Totals 


District 


10 


Wake 




District 


11 


Harnett 




Johnston 




Lee 




District Totals 


District 


12 


Cumberland 


Hoke 




District Totals 


District 


13 


Bladen 




Brunswick 


Columbus 




District Totals 


District 


14 


Durham 




District 


15A 


Alamance 




District 


15B 


Chatham 




Orange 




District Totals 


District 


16 


Robeson 




Scotland 




District Totals 


District 


17A 


Caswell 




Rockingham 


District Totals 


District 


17B 



July 1, 1987 - June 30, 1988 



Estates 



Filed 


Dlsposec 


259 


198 


2 56 


260 


229 


251 


284 


273 


211 


211 



1,239 



1,878 



Stokes 
Surry 

District Totals 



1,369 



1,042 
92 

1,134 



217 
426 
399 

1,042 



1,204 



754 



292 
471 

763 



665 
275 

940 



128 
676 

804 



19b 
480 

676 



1,193 



1,786 



423 


394 


635 


b26 


311 


352 



1,372 



981 

99 

1,080 



209 

J94 
454 

1,057 
1,186 

774 



299 
462 

761 



681 
276 

957 



123 
705 

828 



206 

476 

682 



Special Proceedings 



Filed 


Disposed 


214 


187 


331 


315 


140 


137 


176 


165 


104 


85 



970 



2,827 



827 



1,660 



713 



156 
542 

698 



709 

347 

1,056 



106 
365 

471 



132 

307 

439 



889 



2,736 



304 


208 


673 


645 


150 


199 


1,127 


1,052 


2,103 


2,099 


83 


88 


2,186 


2,187 


201 


200 


324 


321 


302 


276 



797 



1,544 



534 



195 
508 

703 



723 
267 

990 



94 
335 

429 



113 

207 

320 



108 



FILINGS AND DISPOSITIONS FOR ESTATES 

AND SPECIAL PROCEEDINGS BEFORE THE CLERKS 

OF SUPERIOR COURT 

July 1, 1987 - June 30, 1988 

Estates Special Proceedings 



District 


18 


Guilford 




District 


19A 



Cabarrus 


Rowan 


District Totals 


District 19B 


Montgomery 


Randolph 


District Totals 


District 20 


Anson 


Moore 


Richmond 


Stanly 


Union 


District Totals 


District 21 



Filed 


Disposed 


2,302 


2,189 


694 


687 


953 


939 



132 


113 


631 


555 


312 


247 


462 


415 


482 


457 


019 


1,787 


899 


1,733 


136 


112 


902 


831 


202 


193 


734 


766 



105 


64 


200 


209 


283 


25 J 


230 


235 



116 


39 


106 


34 


116 


92 


178 


130 


103 


45 



487 


411 


487 


618 


704 


638 


678 


1,667 


984 


3,065 



Filed 


Disposed 


2,367 


2,380 


40 3 


244 


895 


833 



1,647 1,626 1,298 1,077 



184 181 115 53 

661 578 419 439 

845 759 534 492 



9 3 


42 


J57 


360 


289 


200 


205 


143 


294 


244 



1,238 989 



L83 


121 


553 


424 


162 


8 3 


464 


459 



121 


62 


111 


117 


398 


347 


9 2 


96 



Forsyth 1,899 1,733 1,691 1,715 

District 22 

Alexander 

Davidson 

Davie 

Iredell 

District Totals 1,974 1,907 1,362 1,087 

District 23 

Alleghany 

Ashe 

Wilkes 

Yadkin 

District Totals 818 761 722 622 

District 24 

Avery 

Madison 

Mitchell 

Watauga 

Yancey 

District Totals 624 490 492 423 

District 25 
Burke 
Caldwell 
Catawba 

District Totals 

District 26 
Mecklenburg 



9 7 


80 


71 


72 


50 


27 


211 


199 


63 


45 



476 


425 


337 


309 


500 


253 


1,313 


987 


4,307 


4,441 



109 



FILINGS AND DISPOSITIONS FOR ESTATES 

AND SPECIAL PROCEEDINGS BEFORE THE CLERKS 

OF SUPERIOR COURT 



District 27A 
Gaston 



District 27B 

Cleveland 

Lincoln 

District Totals 

District 28 
Buncombe 



July 1, 1987 - June 30, 1988 

Estates 



Filed 


Disposed 


1,183 


1,276 


606 


539 


350 


350 



956 



1,525 



889 



1,583 



Special Proceedings 



Filed 


I) 


isposed 


684 




622 


531 




A00 


189 




191 



720 



1,373 



591 



1,137 



District 29 

Henderson 

McDowell 

Polk 

Rutherford 

Transylvania 

District Totals 

District 30 

Cherokee 

Clay 

Graham 

Haywood 

Jackson 

Macon 

Swain 

District Totals 

State Totals 



753 


663 


248 


200 


148 


17/ 


506 


444 


212 


193 



1,867 



1,677 



179 


170 


42 


28 


40 


43 


364 


352 


163 


131 


223 


202 


52 


50 


1,063 


976 


45,013 


43,288 



330 


371 


243 


233 


02 


73 


263 


193 


103 


9 5 



1,001 



965 



137 


160 


36 


32 


31 


15 


226 


172 


223 


188 


278 


266 


36 


47 


967 


880 


41,881 


37,951 



110 



CASELOAD TRENDS OF CRIMINAL CASES IN THE 
SUPERIOR COURTS 

1978-79 - 1987-88 



T 
H 
O 

u 

s 

A 

N 
D 
S 

o 

F 

C 

A 

S 
E 

S 



90 



80 



70 



60 



50 



40 



30 



20 



10 




End Pending 



78-79 79-80 80-81 



81-82 



82-83 



83-84 



84-85 



85-86 



86-87 



87-88 



The number of criminal cases filed in the superior court 
continued to grow in 1987-88 largely due to an 8.0% 
increase in felony filings compared to 1986-87. Misde- 
meanor filings increased by 4.3%. Criminal filings grew at 



a faster pace than criminal dispositions, resulting in a 
14.0% increase in the number of criminal cases pending in 
superior courts on June 30, 1988, as compared to the 
beginning of the fiscal year. 



Ill 



FILINGS OF CRIMINAL CASES IN THE 
SUPERIOR COURTS - BY TYPE OF CASE 

July 1, 1987 - June 30, 1988 



A total of 88,948 criminal cases were reported filed in the Superior Courts, of which 55,284 were felonies, and 33,664 
misdemeanors. These are broken down into the following specific types of cases: 

FELONIES 

Murder 

Manslaughter 

First Degree Rape 

Other Sex Offenses 

Robbery 

Assault 

Burglary/ Breaking or Entering 

Larceny 

Arson & Burnings 

Forgery & Utterings 

Fraudulent Activity 

Controlled Substances 

Other* 

TOTAL 



Number Filed 


% of Total Filings 


529 


1.0% 


100 


0.2% 


1,391 


2.5% 


371 


0.7% 


2,073 


3.7% 


1,973 


3.6% 


11,823 


21.4% 


6,454 


11.7% 


286 


0.5% 


6,691 


12.1% 


5,045 


9.1% 


11,283 


20.4% 


7,265 


13.1% 


55,284 


100.0% 



MISDEMEANORS 

DWI Appeal 

Other Motor Vehicle Appeal 
Non-Motor Vehicle Appeal 
Misdemeanor Originating in Superior Court 
TOTAL 



6,127 
5,537 

18,209 
3,791 

33,664 



18.2% 

16.4% 

54.1% 

11.3% 

100.0% 



*"Other" felony cases include a wide variety of offenses 
that do not fit squarely into any of the listed offenses 
above, including kidnapping, trespassing, crimes against 
public morality, perjury, and obstructing justice. When 



more than one offense is charged, the first offense listed 
in the criminal pleading (originating document) is used 
to assign the case type given above. 



112 



CASELOAD INVENTORY FOR CRIMINAL CASES 
IN THE SUPERIOR COURTS 

July 1, 1987 - June 30, 1988 









Felonies 










Misdemeanors 








lie g i n 










End 


Begin 










Knd 




Pending 




Total 




% Caseload 


Pending 


Pending 




Total 




% Caseload 


Pending 




7/1/87 


Filed 


Caseload 


Disposed 


Disposed 


6/30/88 


7/1/87 


Filed 


Caseload 


Disposed 


Disposed 


6/30/88 


District 1 


























Camden 


7 


31 


38 


27 


71.1% 


11 


18 


62 


80 


61 


76.3% 


19 


Chowan 


31 


103 


134 


89 


66.4% 


45 


29 


150 


179 


127 


70.9% 


52 


Currituck 


12 


74 


86 


64 


74.4% 


22 


34 


179 


213 


142 


66.7% 


71 


Dare 


86 


311 


397 


242 


61.0% 


155 


112 


708 


820 


562 


68.5% 


258 


Gates 


17 


51 


68 


48 


70.6% 


20 


22 


83 


105 


75 


71.4% 


30 


Pasquotank 


75 


205 


280 


213 


77.9% 


b2 


123 


542 


665 


587 


88.3% 


78 


Perquimans 


10 


57 


67 


21 


31.3% 


46 


40 


112 


152 


113 


74.3% 


39 


District Totals 


238 


832 


1,070 


709 


66.3% 


361 


378 


1,836 


2,214 


1,667 


75.3% 


547 


District 2 


























Beaufort 


108 


366 


474 


394 


83.1% 


80 


105 


326 


431 


343 


79.6% 


88 


Hyde 


16 


52 


68 


34 


50.0% 


34 


2 


26 


28 


18 


64.3% 


10 


Martin 


36 


173 


209 


147 


70.3% 


62 


35 


b3 


98 


74 


75.5% 


24 


Tyrrell 


15 


22 


37 


31 


83.8% 


6 


7 


47 


54 


49 


90.7% 


5 


Washington 


2U 


173 


193 


150 


77.7% 


43 


21 


81 


102 


84 


82.4% 


18 



District Totals 



195 



786 



981 



756 



77.1?. 



225 



170 



543 



713 



568 



79.7% 



145 



District 3 

Carteret 

Craven 

Pamlico 

Pitt 

District Totals 



51 


408 


459 


404 


83.0% 


55 


146 


566 


712 


546 


76.7% 


166 


21 


42 


63 


39 


61.9% 


24 


372 


1,354 


1,726 


1,295 


75.0% 


431 



590 



2,370 2,960 



2,284 



District Totals 630 

District 6 

Bertie 61 

Halifax 66 

Hertford 32 

Northampton 23 



District Totals 



132 



2,865 3,495 2,697 



944 



1,126 



880 



7 7.2% 



77.2% 



78.2% 



676 



District 4 














Duplin 


17 


692 


7 09 


649 


91.5% 


60 


Jones 


56 


64 


120 


114 


95.0% 


6 


Onslow 


260 


1,541 


1,801 


1,520 


84.4% 


281 


Sampson 


10 


457 


467 


296 


63.4% 


171 


District Totals 


343 


2,754 


3,097 


2,579 


83.3% 


518 


District 5 














New Hanover 


418 


2,505 


2,923 


2,282 


78.1% 


641 


Pender 


212 


360 


572 


415 


72.6% 


157 



798 



133 


194 


161 


83.0% 


33 


474 


540 


440 


81.5% 


100 


176 


208 


166 


79.8% 


42 


161 


184 


113 


61.4% 


71 



246 



12 


167 


179 


153 


85.5% 


26 


65 


560 


625 


553 


88.5% 


72 


3 


39 


42 


35 


83.3% 


7 


314 


1,407 


1,721 


1,356 


78.8% 


365 


394 


2,173 


2,567 


2,097 


81.7% 


470 


11 


45 


56 


51 


91.1% 


5 


3 


16 


19 


18 


94.7% 


1 


32 


526 


558 


482 


86.4% 


76 





86 


86 


67 


77.9% 


19 



46 



98 



673 



719 



25 


1,027 


1,152 


30 


100 


130 


55 


1,127 


1,282 


13 


70 


83 


46 


220 


266 


30 


120 


150 


9 


71 


80 



481 



579 



618 



873 

88 

961 



366 



86.0% 



75.8% 
67.7% 

75.0% 



63.2% 



101 



279 

42 

321 



34 


41.0% 


49 


173 


65.0% 


93 


126 


84.0% 


24 


33 


41.3% 


47 



213 



District 7 


























Edgecombe 


109 


355 


464 


313 


67.5% 


151 


74 


241 


315 


244 


77.5% 


71 


Nash 


119 


695 


814 


705 


86.6% 


109 


35 


341 


376 


307 


81.6% 


69 


Wilson 


164 


482 


646 


540 


83.6% 


106 


41 


248 


289 


206 


71.3% 


83 



District Totals 



392 



1,532 1,924 



1,558 



81.0% 



366 



150 



830 



980 



757 



77.2% 



223 



District 8 




























Greene 




17 


83 


105 


84 


80.0% 


21 


12 


58 


70 


60 


85.7% 


10 


Lenoir 




78 


356 


434 


333 


76.7% 


101 


95 


506 


601 


514 


85.5% 


87 


Wayne 




159 


574 


733 


551 


75.2% 


182 


164 


701 


865 


697 


80.6% 


168 


District 


Totals 


254 


1,018 


1,272 


968 


76.1% 


304 


271 


1,265 


1,536 


1,271 


82.7% 


265 



113 



CASELOAD INVENTORY FOR CRIMINAL CASES 
IN THE SUPERIOR COURTS 

July 1, 1987 - June 30, 1988 









Pel 


niles 










Misdemeanors 








Begin 










End 


Begin 










Knd 




Pending 




Total 




% Caseload 


Pending 


Pending 




Total 




% Caseload 


Pending 




7/1/87 


Filed 


Caseload 


Disposed 


Disposed 


6/30/88 


7/1/87 


Filed 


Caseload 


Disposed 


Disposed 


6/30/88 


District 9 


























Franklin 


84 


251 


335 


235 


70.1% 


100 


60 


295 


355 


221 


62.3% 


134 


Granville 


49 


305 


354 


251 


70.9% 


10 3 


4 1 


172 


213 


136 


63.8% 


77 


Person 


83 


274 


35/ 


237 


66.4% 


120 


77 


173 


250 


16 3 


65.2% 


87 


Vance 


132 


420 


552 


30 7 


55.6% 


245 


103 


335 


438 


319 


72.8% 


119 


Warren 


10 


66 


96 


82 


85.4% 


14 


37 


118 


155 


•3 5 


61.3% 


bU 


District Totals 


37a 


1,316 


1,694 


1,112 


65.6% 


582 


318 


1,093 


1,411 


934 


66.2% 


477 


District 10 


























Wake 


1,888 


3,992 


5,880 


4,511 


76.7% 


1,369 


515 


1,811 


2,326 


1,762 


75.8% 


564 


District 11 


























Harnett 


4 9 


28o 


3 34 


28 1 


34.1% 


53 


14 


106 


120 


104 


86.7% 


16 


Johnston 


61 


330 


391 


324 


82.9% 


67 


26 


494 


520 


447 


86.0% 


73 


Lee 


24 


393 


417 


29 9 


71.7% 


118 


11 


229 


240 


198 


82.5% 


42 



District Totals 



134 



1,008 1,142 



904 



79.2% 



238 



51 



829 



880 



749 



85.1% 



131 



District 12 


























Cumberland 


621 


1,998 


2,619 


1,924 


73.5% 


695 


02 


291 


35 3 


235 


66.6% 


118 


Hoke 


35 


156 


191 


150 


78.5% 


41 


13 


7 1 


84 


69 


82.1% 


15 



District Totals 



656 



2,154 2,810 2,074 



73.8% 



736 



75 



362 



437 



304 



69.6% 



133 



District 


13 


























Bladen 




42 


410 


452 


125 


27.7% 


327 


31 


99 


130 


106 


81.5% 


24 


Brunswick 




342 


856 


1,198 


564 


47.1% 


634 


39 


135 


174 


147 


84.5% 


27 


Columbus 




115 


231 


346 


203 


58.7% 


143 


108 


257 


365 


226 


61.9% 


139 


District Totals 


499 


1,497 


1,996 


892 


44.7% 


1,104 


178 


491 


669 


4 79 


71.67. 


190 


District 


14 


























Durham 




737 


1,765 


2,502 


1,880 


75.1% 


622 


250 


350 


600 


398 


66.3% 


202 


District 


15A 


























Alamance 




311 


947 


1,258 


1,045 


83.1% 


213 


155 


604 


759 


i,51 


85.8% 


108 


District 


15B 


























Chatham 




04 


215 


279 


18 1 


67.7% 


90 


47 


81 


128 


91 


71.1% 


37 


Orange 




187 


717 


904 


677 


74.9% 


227 


29 


152 


131 


140 


77.3% 


41 



District Totals 

District 16 

Robeson 

Scotland 

District Totals 

District 17A 

Caswell 
Rockingham 

District Totals 

District 17B 

Stokes 

Surry 

District Totals 



251 



3 58 



53 

43 



96 



932 



1,183 



866 



1,101 1,459 



1,105 



878 



974 



702 



73.2% 



317 



34b 


1,761 


2,107 


1,284 


60.9% 


823 


161 


428 


589 


244 


41.4% 


345 


507 


2,189 


2,696 


1,528 


56.7% 


1,168 


8 


12 7 


135 


105 


77.8% 


30 


350 


974 


1,324 


1,000 


75.5% 


324 



75.7% 



72.1% 



354 



283 


336 


261 


77.7% 


75 


59 5 


638 


441 


69.1% 


197 



272 



70 



121 



!33 



309 



231 



798 



919 



813 



74.8% 



88.5% 



78 



193 


779 


972 


675 


69.4% 


297 


136 


250 


386 


131 


33.9% 


255 


329 


1,029 


1,3 58 


806 


59.4% 


552 


43 


194 


239 


188 


78.7% 


51 


229 


856 


1,085 


821 


75.7% 


204 


274 


1,050 


1,324 


1,009 


76.2% 


315 


31 


188 


219 


199 


90.9% 


20 


90 


610 


700 


614 


87.7% 


86 



106 



114 



CASELOAD INVENTORY FOR CRIMINAL CASES 

IN THE SUPERIOR COURTS 

July 1, 1987 - June 30, 1988 



District 13 
Guilford 



District 19A 

Cabarrus 

Rowan 



District Totals 

District 19B 

Montgomery 

Randolph 







Fcl 


onies 








Begin 












End 


Pending 




Total 




% 


Caseload 


Pending 


7/1/87 


Tiled 


Caseload 


Disposed 


I) 


isposed 


6/30/88 


1,861 


3,560 


5,421 


4,109 




75.3% 


1,312 


396 


724 


1,120 


844 




75.4% 


276 


291 


727 


1,018 


900 




38.4% 


118 



District Totals 

District 20 

Anson 

Moore 

Richmond 

Stanly 

Union 

District Totals 

District 21 



687 



71 

526 

597 



27 
196 
106 

54 
166 

549 



Forsyth 


813 


District 22 




Alexander 


30 


Davidson 


227 


Davie 


16 


Iredell 


150 


District Totals 


423 


District 23 




Alleghany 


15 


Ashe 


73 


Wilkes 


136 


Yadkin 


16 



1,451 2,138 1,744 31.6% 394 



169 75.4% 55 
712 64.8% 387 

881 66.6% 442 



153 


224 


573 


1,099 


726 


1,323 


183 


21!. 


537 


733 


604 


710 


336 


390 


502 


668 



2,162 2,711 



91 


121 


537 


764 


90 


106 


462 


612 



1,180 1,603 



17 


32 


48 


121 


304 


440 


201 


217 



160 


76.2% 


50 


569 


77.6% 


164 


581 


81.8% 


129 


218 


55.9% 


172 


532 


79.6% 


136 



2,060 



2,593 3,411 2,542 



1,156 



76.0% 



74.5% 



72.1% 



651 



869 



90 


74.4% 


31 


599 


78.4% 


165 


51 


48.1% 


55 


416 


68.0% 


196 



447 



16 


50.0% 


16 


74 


61.2% 


47 


345 


78.4% 


95 


146 


67.3% 


71 



286 



Misdemeanors 



Begin 
Pending Total 

7/1/87 Filed Caseload Disposed 



Knd 

7d Caseload Pending 
Disposed 6/30/88 



456 



742 



607 



81.8% 



135 



264 


530 


794 


573 


72.2% 


221 


189 


488 


677 


584 


86 . 3% 


93 


453 


1,018 


1,471 


1,157 


78.7% 


314 


125 


301 


426 


268 


62.9% 


158 


303 


740 


1,043 


742 


71.1% 


301 


428 


1,041 


1,469 


1,010 


68.8% 


459 


72 


350 


422 


326 


77.3% 


96 


108 


442 


550 


394 


71.6% 


156 


94 


358 


452 


342 


75.7% 


110 


52 


261 


313 


219 


70.0% 


94 


182 


552 


734 


545 


74.3% 


189 


508 


1,963 


2,471 


1,826 


73.9% 


645 


316 


2,369 


2,685 


2,011 


74.9% 


674 


26 


186 


212 


176 


83.0% 


36 


94 


584 


678 


568 


83.8% 


110 


30 


214 


244 


158 


64.8% 


86 


121 


713 


834 


621 


74.5% 


213 


271 


1,697 


1,968 


1,523 


77.4% 


445 


26 


45 


71 


53 


74.6% 


18 


45 


70 


115 


52 


45.2% 


63 


144 


375 


519 


393 


75.7% 


126 


4 


155 


159 


119 


74.8% 


40 



District Totals 

District 24 

Avery 

Madison 

Mitchell 

Watauga 

Yancey 

District Totals 



240 



29 

24 

62 

200 

30 

345 



570 



568 



810 



76 


105 


84 


108 


95 


157 


261 


461 


52 


32 



913 



581 



420 



71.7% 



46.0% 



229 



58 


55.2% 


47 


41 


38.0% 


67 


100 


63.7% 


57 


188 


40.8% 


273 


33 


40.2% 


49 



493 



219 



20 
13 
20 
45 
24 

122 



645 



211 



864 



47 


67 


18 


31 


58 


78 


70 


115 


18 


42 



333 



617 



210 



71.4% 



63.1% 



247 



53 


79.1% 


14 


10 


32.3% 


21 


49 


62.8% 


29 


73 


63.5% 


42 


25 


59.5% 


17 



123 



District 25 


























Burke 


329 


587 


916 


521 


56.9% 


395 


323 


495 


818 


497 


60.8% 


321 


Caldwell 


200 


702 


902 


597 


66.2% 


305 


218 


579 


797 


574 


72.0% 


223 


Catawba 


801 


1,012 


1,813 


1,108 


61.1% 


705 


376 


672 


1,048 


601 


57.3% 


447 


District Totals 


1,330 


2,301 


3,631 


2,226 


61.3% 


1,405 


917 


1,746 


2,663 


1,672 


62.8% 


991 


District 26 


























Mecklenburg 


1,029 


3,241 


4,270 


3,065 


71.8% 


1,205 


511 


1,602 


2,113 


1,534 


72.6% 


579 



115 



CASELOAD INVENTORY FOR CRIMINAL CASES 
IN THE SUPERIOR COURTS 

July 1, 1987 - June 30, 1988 









Kel 


onies 












Misdemeanors 










Begin 












End 


Begin 












End 




Pending 




Total 




% 


Caseload 


Pending 


Pen dinj; 




Total 




% 


Caseload 


Pending 




7/1/87 


Piled 


Caseload 


Disposed 


1) 


isposed 


6/30/88 


7/1/87 


Filed 


Caseload 


Disposed 


1 


isposed 


6/30/88 


District 27A 






























Gaston 


317 


1,471 


1,788 


1,396 




78.1% 


392 


221 


917 


1,138 


7U2 




61.7% 


436 


District 27B 






























Cleveland 


147 


429 


576 


448 




77.8% 


128 


79 


241 


320 


263 




82.2% 


57 


Lincoln 


72 


302 


3 74 


302 




80.7% 


72 


35 


201 


236 


158 




66.9% 


78 



District Totals 



219 



731 



950 



750 



78.9% 



200 



114 



442 



556 



421 



75.7% 



135 



District 28 



Buncombe 


282 


1 


,011 


1 


,293 


1 


,011 


78.2% 


282 


123 


539 


662 


609 


92.0% 


53 


District 29 
































Henderson 


98 




380 




473 




272 


56.9% 


206 


71 


190 


261 


222 


85.1% 


39 


McDowell 


LOO 




375 




475 




370 


77.9% 


105 


55 


238 


293 


227 


77.5% 


66 


Polk 


30 




53 




83 




32 


38.6% 


51 


18 


49 


67 


32 


47.8% 


35 


Rutherford 


175 




379 




554 




414 


74.7% 


140 


119 


376 


495 


331 


66.9% 


164 


Transylvania 


83 




276 




359 




130 


36.2% 


229 


21 


54 


75 


50 


66.7% 


25 


District Totals 


486 


1 


,463 


1 


,949 


1 


,218 


62.5% 


731 


284 


907 


1,191 


862 


72.4% 


329 


District 30 
































Cherokee 


114 




272 




386 




244 


63.2% 


142 


71 


74 


145 


91 


62.8% 


54 


Clay 


7 




22 




29 




21 


72.4% 


8 


11 


15 


26 


18 


69.2% 


6 


Graham 


41 




4b 




87 




60 


69.0% 


27 


17 


51 


68 


42 


61.8% 


26 


Haywood 


101 




506 




607 




446 


73.5% 


161 


32 


238 


270 


212 


78.5% 


58 


Jackson 


77 




282 




359 




179 


49.9% 


180 


18 


4/ 


65 


39 


60.0% 


26 


Macon 


63 




109 




172 




122 


70.9% 


50 


13 


63 


7b 


51 


67.1% 


25 


Swain 


57 




134 




191 




139 


72.8% 


52 


13 


45 


58 


48 


82.8% 


10 


District Totals 


460 


1 


,371 


1 


,831 


1 


,211 


66.1% 


620 


175 


533 


7 08 


501 


70.8% 


207 


State Totals 18 


,277 


55 


,284 


73 


,561 


53 


,420 


72.6% 20 


,141 


8,952 


33,664 


42,616 


31,703 


74.4% 


10,913 



116 



MANNER OF DISPOSITION OF FELONIES IN THE SUPERIOR COURTS 

July 1, 1987 - June 30, 1988 



Other (1,544) 
2.9% 



Dismissal 
(15,984) 



Not Guilty Plea 

(Jury Trial) 

(2,010) 




Guilty Plea to Offense 
Charged 
(26,828) 



Guilty Plea to 

Lesser Offense 

(7,054) 



Guilty pleas continue to account for more than 60% of 
all superior court felony dispositions, with the over- 
whelming majority of these being guilty pleas to the 
offense as charged. Dismissals on this chart include 
voluntary dismissals with and without leave, and speedy 
trial dismissals. "Other" dispositions, i.e., those which 



do not fall into the specific categories given on this 
chart, may include change of venue, dismissal by the 
court, no true bill, dispositions of writs of habeas cor- 
pus from fugitive warrants, and dispositions of proba- 
tion violations from other countries. 



117 



MANNER OF DISPOSITION OF FELONIES 
IN THE SUPERIOR COURTS 

July 1, 1987 - June 30, 1988 

Guilty Pleas DA Dismissal 







J . .V«J 


Jury 
Trials 






'131111931 


■ 1 


Speedy 

Trial 

Dismissals 


Other 


Total 
Dispositions 


Total 

Negotiated 

Pleas 




As 
Charged 


Lesser 
Offense 


Without 
Leave 


With 
Leave 


After Deferred 
Prosecution 


District 1 

Camden 

Chowan 

Currituck 

Dare 

Gates 

Pasquotank 

Perquimans 


8 

3 

36 

113 

7 

86 

8 


6 
57 

1 
14 
31 
40 

6 


2 

3 

5 
11 

1 
21 




3 
16 
16 
92 

7 
64 

3 



2 



1 

5 























8 
3 
6 
11 
2 
2 
4 


27 
89 
o4 

242 
43 

218 
21 


9 

74 
37 
lb 
4U 
159 
13 


District Totals 
% of Total 


261 
36.8% 


155 
21.9% 


48 
6.8% 


201 
28.3% 


8 
1.1% 







.0% 



0.0% 


36 
5.1% 


709 
100.0% 


348 
49.1% 


District 2 

Beaufort 

Hyde 

Martin 

Tyrrell 

Washington 


221 

20 

101 

20 

92 


67 
1 

14 
1 

13 


26 

2 

15 

3 

7 


65 
8 
8 
3 

28 


8 

6 
4 
6 












2 








5 
3 
3 

4 


394 

34 

147 

31 

150 


311 

20 

103 

13 

88 


District Totals 
% of Total 


454 

60.1% 


96 
12.7% 


53 
7.0% 


112 
14.8% 


24 
3.2% 






.0% 


2 
0.3% 


15 
2.0% 


756 
100.0% 


535 
70.8% 


District 3 

Carteret 

Craven 

Pamlico 

Pitt 


225 

279 

16 

655 


15 

57 

6 

302 



3 


42 


133 

171 

13 

246 


15 

27 

1 
39 

















16 
9 
3 

11 


404 

54b 

39 

1,295 


230 

372 

34 

1,009 


District Totals 
% of Total 


1,175 
51.4% 


380 
16.6% 


45 
2.0% 


563 

24.6% 


82 

3.6% 







.0% 



0.0% 


39 
1.7% 


2,284 

100.0% 


1,645 
72.0% 


District 4 

Duplin 

Jones 

Onslow 

Sampson 


291 

51 

573 

177 


126 

4 

167 

27 


11 
3 

63 
5 


219 

56 

671 

30 






24 

2 














u 


2 



22 

5 


649 

114 

1,520 

296 


600 
107 
696 
154 


District Totals 
% of Total 


1,092 
42.3% 


324 
12.6% 


82 
3.2% 


1,026 
39.8% 


26 
1.0% 






.0% 



0.0% 


29 
1.1% 


2,579 
100.0% 


1,557 
60.4% 


District 5 
New Hanover 
Pender 


1,313 

161 


332 
47 


55 
14 


541 

186 


28 

1 













13 
6 


2,282 
415 


991 

269 


District Totals 
% of Total 


1,474 
54.7% 


379 
14.1% 


69 
2.6% 


727 
27.0% 


29 
1.1% 







.ox 



0.0% 


19 
0.7% 


2,697 
100.0% 


1,260 
46.7% 


District 6 

Bertie 

Halifax 

Hertford 

Northampton 


22 

141 

86 

54 


82 

41 

14 

7 


16 
17 
17 
13 


35 

223 

33 

35 


3 

6 

I 
1 






9 







1 





3 

2 

15 

3 


161 

440 

16b 
113 


111 
334 
118 

88 


District Totals 
% of Total 


303 

34.4% 


144 
16.4% 


63 
7.2% 


326 

37.0% 


11 
1.3% 


1 


9 

.0% 


1 

0.1% 


23 
2.6% 


880 
100.0% 


651 
74.0% 


District 7 
Edgecombe 
Nash 
Wilson 


128 
359 
336 


25 

66 
36 


9 
17 
35 


132 

227 
104 


7 

25 

4 
















12 
11 

25 


313 

705 
540 


14b 
408 
381 


District Totals 
% of Total 


823 
52.8% 


127 

8.2% 


61 
3.9% 


463 
29.7% 


36 
2.3% 







.0% 



0.0% 


48 
3.1% 


1,558 

100.0% 


935 
60.0% 



118 



MANNER OF DISPOSITION OF FELONIES 
IN THE SUPERIOR COURTS 

July 1, 1987 - June 30, 1988 

DA Dismissal 





UUM 


} i icoa 


Jury 




Ut\ L. 


rismiaai 


II 


Speedy 
Trial 




Total 


Total 




As 


Lesser 


Without 


With 


After 


Deferred 


Negotiated 




Charged 


Offense 


Trials 


Leave 


Leave 


Prosecution 


Dismissals 


Other 


Dispositions 


Pleas 


District 8 
























Greene 


3 


44 


2 


30 


3 










2 


84 


64 


Lenoir 


162 


31 


28 


80 


22 










10 


333 


237 


Wayne 


232 


93 


35 


167 


10 










14 


551 


326 


District Totals 


397 


168 


65 


277 


35 










26 


968 


627 


% of Total 


41.0% 


17.4% 


6.7% 


28.6% 


3.6% 





.0% 


0.0% 


2.7% 


100.0% 


64.8% 


District 9 
























Franklin 


114 


33 


5 


71 


2 










10 


235 


189 


Granville 


152 


35 


11 


43 


1 










9 


251 


183 


Person 


118 


49 


15 


4b 


2 










7 


237 


170 


Vance 


139 





6 


81 


16 










15 


307 


186 


Warren 


60 


9 


1 


12 
















82 


68 


District Totals 


633 


126 


38 


253 


21 










41 


1,112 


796 


% of Total 


56.9% 


11.3% 


3.4% 


22.8% 


1.9% 





.0% 


0.0% 


3.7% 


100.0% 


71.6% 


District 10 
























Wake 


2,368 


328 


78 


1,232 


396 







28 


81 


4,511 


2,628 


% of Total 


52.5% 


7.3% 


1.7% 


27.3% 


8.8% 





.0% 


0.6% 


1.8% 


100.0% 


58.3% 


District 11 
























Harnett 


155 


38 


8 


59 













21 


281 


147 


Johns ton 


202 


45 


5 


64 


4 










4 


324 


246 


Lee 


188 


53 


8 


33 


10 










7 


299 


230 


District Totals 


545 


136 


21 


156 


14 










32 


904 


623 


% of Total 


60.3% 


15.0% 


2.3% 


17.3% 


1.5% 





.0% 


0.0% 


3.5% 


100.0% 


68.9% 


District 12 
























Cumberland 


1,307 


137 


63 


327 


35 










55 


1,924 


1,336 


Hoke 


116 


2 


4 


17 


1 










10 


150 


110 


District Totals 


1,423 


139 


67 


344 


36 










65 


2,074 


1,446 


% of Total 


68.6% 


6.7% 


3.2% 


16.6% 


1.7% 





.0% 


0.0% 


3.1% 


100.0% 


69.7% 


District 13 
























Bladen 


51 


21 


5 


41 


2 










5 


125 


71 


Brunswick 


234 


82 


26 


204 


13 










5 


564 


404 


Columbus 


79 


6 


14 


86 


2 







1 


15 


203 


99 


District Totals 


364 


109 


45 


331 


17 







1 


25 


892 


574 


% of Total 


40.8% 


12.2% 


5.0% 


37.1% 


1.9% 





.0% 


0.1% 


2.8% 


100.0% 


64.3% 


District 14 
























Durham 


1,078 


233 


43 


418 


74 










34 


1,880 


1,319 


% of Total 


57.3% 


12.4% 


2.3% 


22.2% 


3.9% 





.0% 


0.0% 


1.8% 


100.0% 


70.2% 


District 15A 
























Alamance 


657 


91 


50 


215 


8 










24 


1,045 


816 


% of Total 


62.9% 


8.7% 


4.8% 


20.6% 


0.8% 





.0% 


0.0% 


2.3% 


100.0% 


78.1% 


District 15B 
























Chatham 


100 


16 


16 


49 


•4 










4 


189 


143 


Orange 


377 


25 


7 


192 


21 










55 


677 


395 


District Totals 


477 


41 


23 


241 


25 










59 


866 


538 


% of Total 


55.1% 


4.7% 


2.7% 


27.8% 


2.9% 





.0% 


0.0% 


6.8% 


100.0% 


62.1% 


District 16 
























Robeson 


1,053 


26 


109 


44 


18 







3 


31 


1,284 


247 


Scotland 


201 


15 


9 


2 







1 





16 


244 


89 


District Totals 


1,254 


41 


118 


46 


18 




1 


3 


47 


1,528 


336 


% of Total 


82.1% 


2.7% 


7.7% 


3.0% 


1.2% 





.1% 


0.2% 


3.1% 


100.0% 


22.0% 



119 



MANNER OF DISPOSITION OF FELONIES 
IN THE SUPERIOR COURTS 

July 1, 1987 - June 30, 1988 

DA Dismissal 







V.IUII 


} i icai 


Jury 
Trials 






13111133d 


I 


Speedy 

Trial 

Dismissals 


Other 


Total 
Dispositions 


Total 




As 
Charged 


Lesser 
Ofrense 


Without 
Leave 


With 
Leave 


After Deterred 
Prosecution 


Negotiated 
Pleas 


District 17A 

Caswell 

Rockingham 




47 
706 


31 
78 


15 

20 


7 

169 



14 












5 
13 


105 
1,000 


60 
765 


District To 
X of Total 


tals 


753 

68.1% 


109 
9.9% 


35 

3.2% 


176 
15.9% 


14 
1.3% 







.0% 




0.0% 


18 
1.6% 


1,105 
100.0% 


825 

74.7% 


District 17B 

Stokes 

Surry 




199 

370 


6 
21 


19 
7 


1 

24 



6 




u 








36 
13 


261 

441 


64 
173 


District Totals 
% of Total 


569 
81.1% 


27 
3.8% 


26 
3.7% 


25 

3.6% 


6 
0.9% 






.0% 



0.0% 


49 
7.0% 


702 
100.0% 


237 
33.8% 


District 18 
Guilford 
% of Total 




2,655 
64.6% 


217 
5.3% 


129 
3.1% 


843 

20.5% 


180 

4.4% 






.0% 



0.0% 


85 
2.1% 


4,109 
100.0% 


2,762 
67.2% 


District 19A 

Cabarrus 

Rowan 




320 
331 


125 
206 


31 
31 


350 
301 


5 
13 












13 
18 


844 
900 


405 
575 


District Totals 
% of Total 


651 
37.3% 


331 
19.0% 


62 
3.6% 


651 
37.3% 


18 
1.0% 






.0% 



0.0% 


31 
1.8% 


1,744 
100.0% 


980 
56.2% 


District 19B 

Montgomery 

Randolph 




61 
328 


23 

52 


10 
47 


60 
201 



58 






1 







15 

25 


169 

712 


82 
342 


District To 
% of Total 


tals 


389 

44.2% 


75 
8.5% 


57 
6.5% 


261 
29.6% 


58 
6.6% 





1 
.1% 



0.0% 


40 
4.5% 


881 
100.0% 


424 
48.1% 


District 20 

Anson 

Moore 

Richmond 

Stanly 

Union 




31 
175 
248 

77 
239 


70 
81 
46 
39 
71 


7 

11 

14 

9 

11 


45 
275 
241 

78 
185 








6 


















7 
27 
26 
15 
20 


160 
569 
581 
218 
532 


103 
318 
443 
166 
416 


District Totals 
% of Total 


770 
37.4% 


307 
14.9% 


52 
2.5% 


824 
40.0% 


12 
0.6% 






.0% 



0.0% 


95 
4.6% 


2,060 
100.0% 


1,446 
70.2% 


District 21 
Forsyth 
% of Total 




1,539 
60.5% 


433 

17.0% 


76 
3.0% 


368 

14.5% 


60 
2.4% 







.0% 



0.0% 


66 
2.6% 


2,542 
100.0% 


1,500 
59.0% 


District 22 

Alexander 

Davidson 

Davie 

Iredell 




41 
387 

28 
238 


9 

42 

3 

26 


i 
12 

6 
30 


28 

116 

6 

100 



6 



















4 
36 

8 
22 


90 
599 

51 
416 


64 
368 

20 
208 


District To 
X of Total 


tals 


694 
60.0% 


80 
6.9% 


56 
4.8% 


250 
21.6% 


6 
0.5% 







.0% 



0.0% 


70 
6.1% 


1,156 

100.0% 


660 

57.1% 


District 23 

Alleghany 

Ashe 

Wilkes 

Yadkin 




3 

28 

215 

126 


7 

9 

37 

9 


5 

2 

11 

3 


1 
21 
42 

7 



10 
19 




















4 

21 

1 


16 

74 

34 5 

146 


13 

44 

159 

131 


District To 
% of Total 


tals 


372 
64.0% 


62 
10.7% 


21 

3.6% 


71 

12.2% 


29 
5.0% 







.0% 



0.0% 


26 

4.5% 


581 

100.0% 


347 
59.7% 



120 



MANNER OF DISPOSITION OF FELONIES 
IN THE SUPERIOR COURTS 

July 1, 1987 - June 30, 1988 





Gui 


Ity Pleas 


Jury 
Trials 




DA D 


ismissal 


Speedy 

Trial 

Dismissals 


Other 


Total 
Dispositions 


Total 




As 
Charged 


Lesser 
Offense 


Without 
Leave 


With 
Leave 


After Deferred 
Prosecution 


Negotiated 
Pleas 


District 24 

Avery 

Madison 

Mitchell 

Watauga 

Yancey 



13 
13 

41 



16 
11 

32 
71 
13 


21 

8 
2 

13 

5 


19 
4 
49 
63 
15 


1 
1 
1 





1 
1 












1 
3 
2 




58 

41 

100 

183 

33 


32 

2i 

78 

156 

21 


District Totals 
% of Total 


67 
16.0% 


143 

34.0% 


49 
11.7% 


150 
35.7% 


3 

0.7% 


2 
0.5% 



0.0% 


6 
1.4% 


420 

100.0% 


315 
75.0% 


District 25 
Burke 
Caldwell 
Catawba 


188 
205 
503 


63 

37 




16 
13 

27 


210 
252 
462 


33 
28 
34 












6 
12 

82 


521 

59 7 

1,108 


131 
445 
489 


District Totals 
% of Total 


896 
40.3% 


155 
7.0% 


56 
2.5% 


924 
41.5% 


95 
4.3% 



0.0% 



0.0% 


100 
4.5% 


2,226 

100.0% 


1,115 
50.1% 


District 26 
Mecklenburg 
% of Total 


229 

7.5% 


1,622 
52.9% 


96 
3.1% 


856 
27.9% 


190 
6.2% 



0.0% 


3 
0.1% 


69 
2.3% 


3,065 
100.0% 


1,633 
53.3% 


District 27A 
Gaston 

% of Total 


543 
38.9% 


93 
6.7% 


82 
5.9% 


515 
36.9% 


101 
7.2% 



0.0% 


1 
0.1% 


61 
4.4% 


1,396 

100.0% 


617 
44. 2% 


District 27B 

Cleveland 

Lincoln 


163 
169 


56 
16 


17 
14 


190 

74 


7 
5 










15 

24 


448 
302 


92 

16b 


District Totals 
% of Total 


332 
44.3% 


72 
9.6% 


31 
4.1% 


264 
35.2% 


12 
1.6% 



0.0% 



0.0% 


39 
5.2% 


750 
100.0% 


258 

34.4% 


District 28 
Buncombe 
% of Total 


667 
66.0% 


46 
4.5% 


16 
1.6% 


228 
22.6% 


39 
3.9% 



0.0% 



0.0% 


15 
1.5% 


1,011 

100.0% 


687 

68.0% 


District 29 

Henderson 

McDowell 

Polk 

Rutherford 

Transylvania 


153 

226 

7 

223 

39 


24 
35 
4 
62 
17 


6 

5 

1 

22 

7 


57 
96 
19 
93 
49 


24 
6 

9 

14 
















8 
2 

1 
5 
4 


272 

370 

32 

414 

130 


166 

324 

9 

298 

82 


District Totals 
% of Total 


648 
53.2% 


142 
11.7% 


41 
3.4% 


314 
25.8% 


53 

4.4% 



0.0% 



0.0% 


20 
1.6% 


1,218 
100.0% 


879 

72.2% 


District 30 

Cherokee 

Clay 

Graham 

Haywood 

Jackson 

Macon 

Swain 



10 

2 

151 

57 

19 

37 


3 
3 
' 7 
55 
19 
17 
19 


9d 
2 
1 

39 
3 
6 
9 


113 

5 

43 

165 
77 
75 
43 


4 


1 
3 
2 
1 
2 





b 
















23 
1 


33 

21 
4 

29 


244 

21 
60 
446 
179 
122 
139 


202 
13 
16 

257 

162 
92 

100 


District Totals 
% of Total 


276 
22.8% 


123 
10.2% 


156 
12.9% 


526 

43.4% 


13 
1.1% 


6 
0.5% 



0.0% 


111 

9.2% 


1,211 

100.0% 


842 
69.5% 


State Totals 
% of Total 


26,828 
50.2% 


7,054 
13.2% 


2,010 
3.8% 


14,177 
26.5% 


1,749 
3.3% 


19 
0.0% 


39 
0.1% 


1,544 
2.9% 


53,420 
100.0% 


32,161 
60.2% 



121 



MANNER OF DISPOSITION OF MISDEMEANORS IN THE SUPERIOR COURTS 

July 1, 1987 - June 30, 1988 



Other 
(11,159) 




Guilty Plea to Offense 
Charged 
(10,292) 



Dismissal 
(7,725) 



Guilty Plea to 

Lesser Offense 

(1,426) 

Not Guilty Plea 

(Jury Trial) 

(1,101) 



Guilty pleas account for 37% of misdemeanor disposi- 
tions in superior court, the overwhelming majority of 
which are guilty pleas to the offense charged. The "other" 
category on this chart includes withdrawn appeals, cases 
remanded to district court for judgment, and other mis- 
cellaneous dispositions such as change of venue, dismissal 



by the court, no true bill, probation violations from other 
counties, and dispositions of writs of habeas corpus from 
fugitive warrants. Dismissals on this chart include volun- 
tary dismissals with and without leave, and speedy trial 
dismissals. 



122 



MANNER OF DISPOSITION OF MISDEMEANORS 
IN THE SUPERIOR COURTS 

July 1, 1987 - June 30, 1988 







Guilty Picas 


Jury 
Trials 




DA 


Dismissal 


Speedy 

Trial 

Dismissals 


Other 


Total 
Dispositions 


Total 




As 
Charged 


Lesser 
Offense 


Without 
Leave 


With 
Leave 


After Deferred 
Prosecution 


Negotiated 
Pleas 


District 1 

Camden 

Chowan 

Currituck 

Dare 

Gates 

Pasquotank 

Perquimans 




32 
35 
76 

14b 
22 

153 
62 


8 
8 
8 
7 

15 
6 

12 


2 



7 
14 

2 
14 

6 


4 
21 

13 
74 
10 
66 
11 


4 

8 
2 
3 
32 



























11 
63 
30 

319 

23 

316 

22 


61 
127 
142 
562 

75 
587 
113 


15 
35 
37 
9 
18 
78 
29 


District Totals 
% of Total 


526 
31.6% 


64 
3.8% 


45 
2.7% 


199 
11.9% 


49 
2.9% 







.0% 







.0% 


784 
47.0% 


1,667 
100.0% 


221 
13.3% 


District 2 

Beaufort 

Hyde 

Martin 

Tyrrell 

Washington 




109 

9 

24 

32 

19 


22 


6 


3 


14 
2 
9 
2 

7 


67 

5 
4 
6 


11 


16 
1 
3 























120 
7 

14 

10 
46 


343 
18 
74 

49 
84 


109 
3 

15 
b 

2 


District Totals 
% of Total 


193 

34.0% 


31 

5.5% 


34 
6.0% 


82 
14.4% 


31 

5.5% 






.0% 






.0% 


197 
34.7% 


568 
100.0% 


135 

23.8% 


District 3 

Carteret 

Craven 

Pamlico 

Pitt 




74 
217 

lb 
568 


5 

27 
4 

29 



9 


37 


21 

67 

8 

151 



19 



130 




















53 

214 

7 

441 


153 

553 

35 

1,3 56 


21 
151 

21 
366 


District Tc 
% of Total 


tals 


875 
41.7% 


65 
3.1% 


46 
2.2% 


247 
11.8% 


149 
7.1% 






.0% 






.0% 


715 
34.1% 


2,097 
100.0% 


559 
26.7% 


District 4 

Duplin 

Jones 

Onslow 

Sampson 




8 

3 

215 

2 4 


3 
5 
8 
2 


2 

4 

31 

4 


23 

1 

134 

26 



2 

11 
1 



















15 

3 

83 

10 


51 

18 

482 

67 


27 

8 

172 

17 


District To 
% of Total 


tals 


250 
40.5% 


18 
2.9% 


41 

6.6% 


184 
29.8% 


14 
2.3% 






.0% 






.0% 


111 
18.0% 


618 
100.0% 


224 
36.2% 


District 5 
New Hanover 
Pender 




449 
41 


52 

8 


22 

10 


194 
17 


21 
2 















135 
10 


873 

88 


231 
29 


District To 
% of Total 


tals 


490 
51.0% 


60 
6.2% 


32 
3.3% 


211 
22.0% 


23 
2.4% 






.0% 






.0% 


145 
15.1% 


961 
100.0% 


260 
27.1% 


District 6 

Bertie 

Halifax 

Hertford 

Northampton 




3 

36 

20 

9 


10 


1 




1 
4 
2 




13 
30 
14 
11 


1 
9 

b 
1 



















6 

94 
83 
12 


34 

17 3 

12b 

33 


17 
b2 
20 
13 


District To 
% of Total 


tals 


68 
18.6% 


11 

3.0% 


7 
1.9% 


68 
13.6% 


17 
4.6% 







.0% 







.0% 


195 
53.3% 


366 
100.0% 


112 

30.6% 


District 7 
Edgecombe 
Nash 
Wilson 




78 

104 

49 


3 

16 

5 


7 

4 
6 


65 
76 
46 


21 

19 

6 
















70 

88 
94 


244 
307 
206 


53 
40 
3b 


District Tc 
% of Total 


tals 


231 

30.5% 


24 
3.2% 


17 
2.2% 


187 
24.7% 


46 
6.1% 







.0% 






.0% 


252 

33.3% 


757 

100.0% 


129 

17.0% 



123 



MANNER OF DISPOSITION OF MISDEMEANORS 
IN THE SUPERIOR COURTS 

July 1, 1987 - June 30, 1988 

Guilty Picas DA Dismissal 











Jury 
Trials 






' I3II1I33UI 


Speedy 

Trial 

Dismissals 


Other 


Total 
Dispositions 


Total 

Negotiated 

Pleas 




As 
Charged 


Lesser 
Offense 


Without 
Leave 


With 
Leave 


After Deferred 
Prosecution 


District 8 
Greene 
Lenoir 
Wayne 




14 
153 
137 


24 
36 

65 


2 
16 
27 


11 
104 
131 


2 

28 
23 













7 

172 

314 


60 
514 
697 


11 
155 
178 


District To 
X of Total 


tals 


309 
24.3% 


125 

9.8% 


45 
3.5% 


246 
19.4% 


53 
4.2% 



0.0% 



0.0% 


493 
38.8% 


1,271 
100.0% 


344 
27.1% 


District 9 

Franklin 

Granville 

Person 

Vance 

Warren 




111 
41 
52 

174 
44 


8 
8 
8 


4 




3 
1 
9 



36 
35 

37 
84 
18 




4 
5 
4 
3 

















66 
45 
60 
48 
26 


221 

136 

163 

319 

9 5 


121 

48 

60 

156 

46 


District To 
% of Total 


tals 


422 
45.2% 


28 
3.0% 


13 
1.4% 


210 
22.5% 


16 
1.7% 



0.0% 



0.0% 


245 
26.2% 


934 
100.0% 


431 
46.1% 


District 10 
Wake 

% of Total 




396 
22.5% 


31 
1.8% 


30 
1.7% 


283 
16.1% 


439 
24.9% 



0.0% 


7 
0.4% 


576 
32.7% 


1,762 
100.0% 


380 
21.6% 


District 11 
Harnett 
Johnston 
Lee 




37 
119 

87 


8 

32 

6 


5 
3 
2 


14 

51 
38 




15 

5 













40 

222 

60 


104 
447 
198 


32 
138 
105 


District To 
X of Total 


tals 


243 
32.4% 


46 
6.1% 


15 
2.0% 


103 
13.8% 


20 
2.7% 



0.0% 



0.0% 


322 
43.0% 


749 
100.0% 


275 
36.7% 


District 12 

Cumberland 

Hoke 




66 
22 



2 


25 
1 


25 
9 


14 

6 










105 
29 


235 

69 


59 
17 


District To 
% of Total 


tals 


88 
28.9% 


2 
0.7% 


26 
8.6% 


34 
11.2% 


20 
6.6% 



0.0% 



0.0% 


134 
44.1% 


304 
100.0% 


76 
25.0% 


District 13 
Bladen 
Brunswick 
Columbus 




24 
52 

74 


9 

14 
4 


5 

13 

19 


25 
30 
32 


3 

11 

5 





1 







40 
27 
91 


106 

147 
226 


28 

49 
67 


District To 
% of Total 


tals 


150 
31.3% 


27 
5.6% 


37 

7.7% 


87 
18.2% 


19 

4.0% 


1 

0.2% 



0.0% 


158 
33.0% 


479 
100.0% 


144 
30.1% 


District 14 
Durham 

% of Total 




118 
29.6% 


21 
5.3% 


13 

3.3% 


89 
22.4% 


19 

4.8% 



0.0% 



0.0% 


138 
34.7% 


398 
100.0% 


140 
35.2% 


District 15A 
Alamance 
% of Total 




296 
45.5% 


9 

1.4% 


22 
3.4% 


98 
15.1% 


18 

2.8% 



0.0% 



0.0% 


208 

32.0% 


651 
100.0% 


289 
44.4% 


District 15B 

Chatham 

Orange 




20 
IS 


6 

1 


8 
5 


7 

69 




2 











50 
45 


91 
140 


25 
18 


District To 
% of Total 


tals 


38 
16.5% 


7 
3.0% 


13 
5.6% 


76 
32.9% 


2 
0.9% 




0.0% 



0.0% 


95 
41.1% 


231 
100.0% 


43 
18.6% 


District 16 

Robeson 

Scotland 




273 

43 


1 
2 


53 

7 


2 5 
3 


14 







4 



300 

76 


675 

131 


63 
16 


District Totals 
% of Total 


316 
39.2% 


3 

0.4% 


65 

8.1% 


28 
3.5% 


14 
1.7% 



0.0% 


4 
0.5% 


376 

46.7% 


806 

100.0% 


84 
10.4% 



124 



MANNER OF DISPOSITION OF MISDEMEANORS 
IN THE SUPERIOR COURTS 

July 1, 1987 - June 30, 1988 

Guilty Picas DA Dismissal 







As 
Charged 


Lesser 
Offense 


Jury 
Trials 


Without 
Leave 


With 
Leave 


After Deferred 
Prosecution 


District 17A 

Caswell 

Rockingham 




69 
426 


45 
35 


11 
22 


38 
82 



31 








District To 
% of Total 


tals 


495 
49.1% 


80 
7.9% 


33 
3.3% 


120 
11.9% 


31 
3.1% 







.0% 


District 17B 

Stokes 

Surry 




118 
271 


6 
2 


12 
16 


3 
18 


7 

31 








District To 
% of Total 


tals 


389 
47.8% 


8 
1.0% 


28 
3.4% 


21 
2.6% 


38 
4.7% 







.0% 


District 18 
Guilford 
% of Total 




257 
42.3% 


8 
1.3% 


20 
3.3% 


126 
20.8% 


48 
7.9% 






.0% 


District 19A 

Cabarrus 

Rowan 




202 
123 


14 
16 


13 
19 


106 

161 


55 

51 








District Totals 
% of Total 


325 
28.1% 


30 
2.6% 


37 
3.2% 


267 
23.1% 


106 
9.2% 







.0% 


District 19B 

Montgomery 

Randolph 




77 
321 


11 
11 




14 


77 
106 




94 








District To 
% of Total 


tals 


398 

39 . 4% 


22 
2.2% 


14 
1.4% 


183 
18.1% 


94 
9.3% 







.0% 


District 20 

Anson 

Moore 

Richmond 

S tanly 

Union 




80 
130 

96 

65 

144 


61 
11 
13 
8 
31 


9 
5 

1 
4 


70 

118 

99 

39 

157 


1 

4 
4 
18 












District To 
% of Total 


tals 


515 
28.2% 


124 
6.8% 


19 
1.0% 


483 
26.5% 


27 
1.5% 







.0% 


District 21 
Forsyth 
% of Total 




851 
42.3% 


79 
3.9% 


31 
1.5% 


269 
13.4% 


140 
7.0% 







.0% 


District 22 

Alexander 

Davidson 

Davie 

Iredell 




25 
122 

33 
123 


4 
9 
5 
7 


3 

8 

3 

13 


22 

88 

5 

85 


4 
31 


12 










District Totals 
% of Total 


303 
19.9% 


25 

1.6% 


27 
1.8% 


200 
13.1% 


47 
3.1% 







.0% 


District 23 

Alleghany 

Ashe 

Wilkes 

Yadkin 




2 

15 
85 

45 




1 

15 

7 


9 

6 

19 

6 


14 
9 

25 
6 


1 

2 

15 

2 










District To 
% of Total 


tals 


147 
23.8% 


23 

3.7% 


40 
6.5% 


54 
8.8% 


20 
3.2% 






.0% 



Speedy Total 

Trial Total Negotiated 

Dismissals Other Dispositions Pleas 



58 
370 






25 


188 





225 


821 





250 


1,009 


0.0% 


24.8% 


100.0% 





53 


199 





276 


614 





329 


813 


0.0% 


40.5% 


100.0% 





148 


607 


0.0% 


24.4% 


100.0% 





178 


573 





214 


584 





392 


1,157 


0.0% 


33.9% 


100.0% 





103 


268 





19 b 


742 





299 


1,010 


0.0% 


29.6% 


100.0% 





105 


326 





130 


394 





130 


342 





102 


219 





191 


545 





658 


1,826 


0.0% 


36.0% 


100.0% 





641 


2,011 


0.0% 


31.9% 


100.0% 





118 


176 





310 


568 





112 


158 





38 1 


02 1 





921 


1,523 


0.0% 


60 . 5% 


100.0% 





27 


53 





19 


52 





234 


393 





53 


119 





333 


617 


0.0% 


54.0% 


100.0% 



428 
42.4% 



15 
81 

96 
11.8% 



244 
40.2% 



94 

108 

202 
17.5% 



71 
218 

289 
28.6% 



92 
165 
169 

55 
213 

694 
38.0% 



690 
34.3% 



21 

92 

8 

68 

189 

12.4% 



7 
14 
28 
43 

92 
14.9% 



125 



District 24 

Avery 

Madison 

Mitchell 

Watauga 

Yancey 

District Totals 
% of Total 

District 25 
Burke 
Caldwell 
Catawba 

District Totals 
% of Total 

District 26 
Mecklenburg 
% of Total 

District 27A 
Gaston 

% of Total 

District 27B 

Cleveland 

Lincoln 

District Totals 
% of Total 

District 28 
Buncombe 
% of Total 

District 29 

Henderson 

McDowell 

Polk 

Rutherford 

Transylvania 

District Totals 
% of Total 

District 30 

Cherokee 

Clay 

Graham 

Haywood 

Jackson 

Macon 

Swain 

District Totals 
% of Total 

State Totals 
% of Total 



MANNER OF DISPOSITION OF MISDEMEANORS 
IN THE SUPERIOR COURTS 

July 1, 1987 - June 30, 1988 

Guilty Picas DA Dismissal 



As 
Charged 

1 

3 

7 

L6 

2 

29 
13.8% 



8/ 
80 

157 

19.4% 



153 

21.8% 



54 
38 

92 
21.9% 



371 

60.9% 



113 

121 

11 

138 

14 

397 

46.1% 



1 
7 
24 
8') 
3 
9 
8 

141 
28.1% 



Lesser 
Offense 

8 
. 
2 
3 
6 

19 
9.0% 



li 

43 



66 
3.9% 



Speedy 

Jury Without With After Deferred Trial Total 

Trials Leave Leave Prosecution Dismissals Other Dispositions 



96 289 

6.3% 18.8% 



5 

0.7% 



23 
b 

29 
6.9% 



7 

1.1% 



19 
2.2% 



3 


4 
b 

6 

1 
1 

21 

4.2% 



25 
2 
3 
7 





11 

9 

14 



23 
11 

34 
3.1% 



18 

3.0% 



1 

17 
4 



31 
3 


15 
4 
2 
4 



11 

3 

22 

31 
11 



43 78 

20.5% 37.1% 



130 
L12 






1 

2 



3 
1.4% 



35 
37 
82 



34 336 154 

2.0% 20.1% 9.2% 



64 630 45 

4.2% 41.1% 2.9=4 



63 191 101 

9.0% 27.2% 14.4% 



74 
45 



119 

28.3% 



60 

9.9% 



32 
47 
8 
63 
18 



5 

1.2% 



45 
7.4% 



5 
9 

15 
3 



36 168 32 

4.2% 19.5% 3.7% 



24 
2 
3 

27 

8 

13 
10 



10,292 1,426 

32.5% 4.52 



59 87 

11.8% 17.4% 0.0% 

1,101 5,824 1,885 

3.5% 18.4% 5.9% 



() 
1 




1 

0.5% 






I) 


0.0% 




0.0% 




0.0% 







0.0% 




0.0% 












0.0% 






1 







1 

0.2% 

3 

0.0% 












3 

1 

14 

14 




53 

10 
49 

73 

25 



0.0% 


37 
17.6% 


210 
100.02 







247 
275 
236 


4'J7 
574 
601 



0.07. 


758 
45.3% 


1,672 
100.0% 


2 

0.1% 


408 
26.6% 


1,534 
100.0% 



0.02 


189 
26.9% 


702 
100.0% 







85 
57 


263 

158 



0.0% 


142 
33.7% 


421 
100.0% 



0.0% 


108 
17.7% 


609 
100.0% 









1) 


b2 
39 
11 
90 
8 


222 

22 7 

i> 

331 

5(J 



0.0% 


210 
24.4% 


862 
100.0% 









I) 




52 

6 

L0 

75 

18 

26 

25 


9 1 
18 

42 
212 

j<( 

5 1 
48 



0.0% 


192 
38.3% 


501 
100.0% 


13 
0.0% 


11,159 
35.2% 


31,703 

100.0% 



Total 

Negotiated 

Pleas 

17 

3 
13 
28 

8 

69 
32.9% 



48 

195 
122 

365 
21.8% 



293 
19.1% 



107 
15.2% 



9 

2 b 

35 
8.3% 



241 

39.6% 



93 

121 

y 

132 
23 

378 
43.9% 



38 
6 
12 
8 5 
15 
15 
13 

184 
36.7% 

3,442 
26.6% 



126 



AGES OF FELONY (FEL) AND MISDEMEANOR (MIS) 
CASES PENDING IN THE SUPERIOR COURTS 

Ages of Cases Pending June 30, 1988 









ARC 


s ot renui 


lg Lnses u 


lays) 




Total 
Pending 


Mean 
Arc 


Median 




0-90 


91-120 


121-180 


1X1-365 


366-730 


>730 


Age 


District 1 






















Camden 


Fel 


4 


1 





6 








11 


160.9 


241.0 




Mis 


11 


1 


1 


4 


2 





19 


145.3 


80.0 


Chowan 


Fel 


21 


16 


3 


3 


2 





45 


94.5 


108.0 




Mis 


31 


9 


2 


8 


2 





52 


96.4 


61.5 


Currituck 


Fel 


4 


1 


5 


8 


4 





22 


257.0 


265.0 




Mis 


34 


5 


12 


11 


9 





71 


160.7 


115.0 


Dare 


Fel 


67 


lb 


16 


37 


19 





155 


162.8 


97.0 




Mis 


86 


a 


4/ 


30 


10 


2 


258 


154.7 


126.0 


Gates 


Fel 


13 





1 





1 





20 


60.7 


38.0 




Mis 


13 


4 


1 


5 


2 





30 


117.5 


63.0 


Pasquotank 


Fel 


42 


12 


3 


5 








62 


68.4 


42.0 




Mis 


53 


7 


3 


15 








78 


97.7 


63.0 


Perquimans 


Fel 


7 


19 


17 


2 


1 





46 


122.5 


106.0 




Mis 


12 


3 


7 


13 


3 


1 


39 


205.4 


134.0 


Dist Totals 


Fel 


163 


65 


45 


61 


27 





361 


132.9 


97.0 


% of Total 




45.2% 


18.0% 


12.5% 


16.9% 


7.5% 


0.0% 


100.0% 








Mis 


245 


62 


73 


136 


23 


3 


547 


143.1 


105.0 


% of Total 




44.8% 


11.3% 


13.3% 


24.9% 


5.1% 


0.5% 


100.0% 






District 2 






















Beaufort 


Fel 


43 


10 


7 


12 


1 


7 


80 


230.1 


69.0 




Mis 


53 


6 


13 


11 








88 


80.5 


44.0 


Hyde 


Fel 


27 





3 


2 


2 





34 


62.1 


10.0 




Mis 


9 





1 











10 


25.0 


10.0 


Martin 


Fel 


40 





19 





3 





62 


109.1 


75.5 




Mis 


12 


1 


2 


) 








24 


120.7 


87.0 


Tyrrell 


Fel 


1 





1 


4 








6 


161.1 


183.0 




Mis 


5 

















5 


49.0 


52.0 


Washington 


Fel 


9 


4 


23 


6 


1 





43 


128.6 


121.0 




Mis 


14 





1 


3 








18 


66.1 


42.5 


Dlst Totals 


Fel 


120 


14 


53 


24 


7 


7 


225 


150.2 


80.0 


% of Total 




53.3% 


6.2% 


23.6% 


10.7% 


3.1% 


3.1% 


100.0% 








Mis 


98 


7 


17 


23 








145 


80.4 


45.0 


% of Total 




67.6% 


4.8% 


11.7% 


15.9% 


0.0% 


0.0% 


100.0% 






District 3 






















Carteret 


Fel 


31 


12 


3 


1 


8 





55 


143.2 


78.0 




Mis 


14 


4 


3 


5 








2 6 


103.8 


75.0 


Craven 


Fel 


114 


7 


13 


30 


2 





166 


85.5 


20.5 




Mis 


55 


9 


4 


4 








72 


69.6 


51.0 


Pamlico 


Fel 


L5 





7 


1 





1 


24 


123.1 


52.0 




Mis 


2 


1 


2 


2 








7 


142.0 


146.0 


Pitt 


Fel 


230 


54 


46 


39 


7 


5 


431 


94.9 


58.0 




Mis 


222 


45 


55 


42 


1 





365 


84.8 


48.0 


Dist Totals 


Fel 


440 


73 


69 


71 


17 


6 


676 


97.5 


52.0 


% of Total 




65.1% 


10.8% 


10.2% 


10.5% 


2.5% 


0.9% 


100.0% 








Mis 


293 


59 


64 


53 


1 





470 


84.4 


51.0 


% of Total 




62.3% 


12.6% 


13.6% 


11.3% 


0.2% 


0.0% 


100.0% 






District 4 






















Duplin 


Fel 


53 





3 


4 








60 


45.7 


10.0 




Mis 


5 

















5 


17.8 


23.0 


Jones 


Fel 


6 

















6 


37.5 


37.5 




Mis 








1 











1 


135.0 


135.0 


Onslow 


Fel 


228 


12 


18 


21 


2 





281 


64.8 


50.0 




Mis 


02 


10 


1 


3 








76 


48.7 


29.0 


Sampson 


Fel 


171 

















171 


29.7 


27.0 




Mis 


17 


2 














19 


27.6 


13.0 


Dist Totals 


Fel 


458 


12 


21 


25 


2 





518 


50.7 


28.0 


% of Total 




88.4% 


2.3% 


4.1% 


4.8% 


0.4% 


0.0% 


100.0% 








Mis 


84 


12 


2 


3 








101 


44.0 


28.0 


% of Total 




83.2% 


11.9% 


2.0% 


3.0% 


0.0% 


0.0% 


100.0% 







127 



AGES OF FELONY (FEL) AND MISDEMEANOR (MIS) 
CASES PENDING IN THE SUPERIOR COURTS 

Ages of Cases Pending June 30, 1988 









Age 


s oi renam 


g cases (L 


rays) 




Total 
Pending 


Mean 
Age 


Median 




0-90 


91-120 


121-180 


181-365 


366-730 


>730 


Age 


District 5 






















New Hanover 


Fel 


360 


82 


72 


9 8 


29 





641 


113.0 


71.0 




Mis 


153 


30 


41 


47 


3 





279 


109.2 


76.0 


Pender 


Fel 


135 


3 


2 


15 





2 


157 


35.1 


59.0 




Mis 


27 


3 


4 


6 


2 





42 


106.3 


49.0 


Dist Totals 


Fel 


495 


85 


74 


113 


29 


2 


798 


107.5 


64.0 


% of Total 




62.0% 


10.7% 


9.3% 


14.2% 


3.6% 


0.3% 


100.0% 








Mis 


180 


33 


45 


53 


10 





321 


108.8 


73.0 


% of Total 




56.1% 


10.3% 


14.0% 


16.5% 


3.1% 


0.0% 


100.0% 






District 6 






















Bertie 


Fel 


20 





6 


5 


2 





33 


118.8 


77.0 




Mis 


20 


2 


5 


13 


8 


1 


49 


194.7 


126.0 


Halifax 


Fel 


48 


21 


8 


21 


2 





lOO 


110.0 


91.0 




Mis 


43 


10 


8 


2 2 


10 





9 3 


150.6 


97.0 


Hertford 


Fel 


20 


6 


7 


7 


1 


1 


42 


127.8 


107.0 




Mis 


11 


9 


2 


1 


1 





24 


107.6 


106.5 


Northampton 


Fel 


28 


10 


22 


11 








71 


109.1 


115.0 




Mis 


13 


8 


10 


lb 








47 


153.1 


123.0 


Dist Totals 


Fel 


116 


37 


43 


44 


5 


1 


246 


114.0 


101.0 


% of Total 




4.7 . 2% 


15.0% 


17.5% 


17. 9% 


2.0% 


0.4% 


100.0% 








Mis 


87 


29 


25 


52 


19 


1 


213 


156.5 


113.0 


% of Total 




40.8% 


13.6% 


11.7% 


24.4% 


8.9% 


0.5% 


100.0% 






District 7 






















Edgecombe 


Fel 


■3 3 


14 


20 


19 


15 





151 


128.4 


78.0 




Mis 


28 


7 


13 


13 


10 





71 


153.2 


125.0 


Nash 


Fel 


90 


9 





9 


1 





109 


58.3 


38.0 




Mis 


4 8 


7 


6 


7 





1 


69 


83.7 


38.0 


Wilson 


Fel 


28 


39 


11 


17 


10 


1 


10b 


170.7 


115.0 




Mis 


3b 


4 


20 


16 


4 


3 


83 


154.3 


129.0 


Dist Totals 


Fe 1 


201 


62 


31 


45 


26 


1 


366 


119.8 


78.0 


% of Total 




54.9% 


16.9% 


8.5% 


12.3% 


7.1% 


0.3% 


100.0% 








Mis 


112 


18 


39 


36 


14 


4 


223 


132.1 


86.0 


% of Total 




50.2% 


8.1% 


17.5% 


16.1% 


6.3% 


1.8% 


100.0% 






District 8 






















Greene 


Fel 


14 





3 


2 


2 





21 


111.3 


45.0 




Mis 


8 


1 


1 











10 


62.0 


56.5 


Lenoir 


Fel 


42 


10 


12 


3b 


1 





101 


138.6 


92.0 




Mis 


62 


9 


4 


11 


I 





87 


76.7 


50.0 


Wayne 


Fel 


1 ) 


26 


20 


26 


7 





182 


103.0 


64.0 




Mis 


83 


22 


2) 


36 


3 


1 


168 


124.6 


96 


Dist Totals 


Fel 


159 


36 


35 


64 


10 





304 


115.4 


83.0 


% of Total 




52.3% 


11.8% 


11.5% 


21.1% 


3.3% 


0.0% 


100.0% 








Mis 


153 


32 


28 


47 


4 


1 


265 


106.5 


69.0 


% of Total 




57.7% 


12.1% 


10.6% 


17.7% 


1.5% 


0.4% 


100.0% 






District 9 






















Franklin 


Fel 


67 


3 


L9 


2 


7 


2 


100 


107.8 


50.0 




Mis 


83 


18 


4 


5 


12 


12 


134 


198.7 


37.0 


Granville 


Fel 


8 2 


6 


7 


7 





1 


10 3 


86.5 


73.0 




Mis 


50 


11 


5 


7 


4 





77 


111.1 


73.0 


Person 


Fel 


56 


19 


33 


3 


2 


7 


120 


189.3 


93.0 




Mis 


42 


14 


9 


10 





7 


87 


165.0 


93.0 


Vance 


Fel 


188 


10 


10 


6 


8 


23 


245 


149.7 


36.0 




Mis 


76 


4 


9 


13 


8 


9 


119 


172.0 


57.0 


Warren 


Fel 


7 


1 


2 


3 


1 





14 


141.0 


87.5 




Mis 


38 


10 


3 


1 


8 





b0 


110.0 


71.0 


Dist Totals 


Fel 


400 


39 


71 


21 


18 


33 


582 


139.3 


64.0 


% of Total 




68.7% 


6.7% 


12.2% 


3.6% 


3.1% 


5.7% 


100.0% 








Mis 


289 


62 


30 


36 


32 


28 


477 


160.6 


64.0 


% of Total 




60.6% 


13.0% 


6.3% 


7.5% 


6.7% 


5.9% 


100.0% 







128 



AGES OF FELONY (FEL) AND MISDEMEANOR (MIS) 
CASES PENDING IN THE SUPERIOR COURTS 

Ages of Cases Pending June 30, 1988 









Ag« 


s ol I'cnrti 


ig Cases (l 


Jays) 




Totiil 
Pending 


Mean 
Age 


Median 




0-90 


91-120 


121-180 


1 81 -365 


366-730 


>730 


Age 


District 10 






















Wake 


Fel 


637 


121 


299 


206 


98 


8 


1,369 


134.0 


104.0 


% of Total 




46.5% 


8.8% 


21.8% 


15.0% 


7.2% 


0.6% 


100.0% 








Mis 


371 


59 


35 


47 


48 


4 


564 


111.6 


55.0 


% of Total 




65.8% 


10.5% 


6.2% 


8.3% 


8.5% 


0.7% 


100.0% 






District 11 






















Harnett 


Fel 


30 


9 





8 


5 


1 


53 


132.4 


83.0 




Mis 


8 


1 


2 





4 


1 


16 


228.5 


87.0 


Johnston 


Fel 


58 


4 


1 


4 








67 


63.5 


51.0 




Mis 


62 


3 


6 


2 








73 


53.0 


36.0 


Lee 


Fel 


76 


18 


12 


9 


3 





118 


71.1 


42.0 




Mis 


28 


2 


4 


7 


1 





42 


90.0 


65.5 


Dlst Totals 


Fel 


164 


31 


13 


21 


8 


1 


238 


82.6 


52.0 


% of Total 




68.9% 


13.0% 


5.5% 


8.8% 


3.4% 


0.4% 


100.0% 








Mis 


98 


6 


12 


9 


5 


1 


131 


86.3 


43.0 


% of Total 




74.8% 


4.6% 


9.2% 


6.9% 


3.8% 


0.8% 


100.0% 






District 12 






















Cumberland 


Fel 


308 


140 


136 


81 


2 7 


3 


695 


117.7 


92.0 




Mis 


60 


35 


12 


7 


4 





118 


97.3 


86.0 


Hoke 


Fel 


8 


3 


4 


23 


3 





41 


211.6 


262.0 




Mis 


10 


2 


1 


2 








15 


78.7 


43.0 


Dlst Totals 


Fel 


316 


143 


140 


104 


30 


3 


736 


122.9 


92.0 


% of Total 




42.9% 


19.4% 


19.0% 


14.1% 


4.1% 


0.4% 


100.0% 








Mis 


70 


37 


13 


9 


4 





133 


95.2 


86.0 


% of Total 




52.6% 


27.8% 


9.8% 


6.8% 


3.0% 


0.0% 


100.0% 






District 13 






















Bladen 


Fel 


306 





5 


16 








Ml 


30.5 


17.0 




Mis 


12 


3 


7 


2 








24 


100.8 


87.0 


Brunswick 


Fel 


487 


18 


17 


13 


88 


n 


634 


140.3 


73.0 




Mis 


7 


2 


4 


13 


1 





27 


173.6 


192.0 


Columbus 


Fel 


53 


5 


7 


59 


12 


7 


143 


249.4 


206.0 




Mis 


91 


13 


10 


16 


6 


3 


1J9 


124.6 


48.0 


Dist Totals 


Fel 


846 


23 


29 


88 


100 


18 


1,104 


121.9 


45.0 


% of Total 




76.6% 


2.1% 


2.6% 


8.0% 


9.1% 


1.6% 


100.0% 








Mis 


110 


18 


21 


31 


7 


3 


190 


128.6 


70.5 


% of Total 




57.9% 


9.5% 


11.1% 


16.3% 


3.7% 


1.6% 


100.0% 






District 14 






















Durham 


Fel 


308 


66 


72 


98 


65 


13 


622 


168.0 


93.0 


% of Total 




49.5% 


10.6% 


11.6% 


15.8% 


10.5% 


2.1% 


100.0% 








Mis 


66 


25 


16 


21 


28 


46 


202 


338.6 


161.0 


% of Total 




32.7% 


12.4% 


7.9% 


10.4% 


13.9% 


22.8% 


100.0% 






District 15A 






















Alamance 


Fel 


174 


22 


10 


6 


1 





213 


56.8 


50.0 


% of Total 




81.7% 


10.3% 


4.7% 


2.8% 


0.5% 


0.0% 


100.0% 








Mis 


82 


5 


4 


13 


3 


1 


108 


91.8 


50.0 


% of Total 




75.9% 


4.6% 


3.7% 


12.0% 


2.8% 


0.9% 


100.0% 






District 15B 






















Chatham 


Fel 


77 


8 


3 


2 








90 


49.5 


35.0 




Mis 


26 


2 


3 


5 


1 





37 


89.3 


45.0 


Orange 


Fel 


152 


25 


31 


16 


3 





227 


85.5 


64.0 




Mis 


22 


6 


7 


5 


1 





41 


94.6 


65.0 


Dist Totals 


Fel 


229 


33 


34 


18 


3 





317 


75.3 


48.0 


% of Total 




72.2% 


10.4% 


10.7% 


5.7% 


0.9% 


0.0% 


100.0% 








Mis 


48 


8 


10 


10 


2 





78 


92.1 


52.0 


% of Total 




61.5% 


10.3% 


12.8% 


12.8% 


2.6% 


0.0% 


100.0% 







129 



AGES OF FELONY (FEL) AND MISDEMEANOR (MIS) 
CASES PENDING IN THE SUPERIOR COURTS 

Ages of Cases Pending June 30, 1988 









Age 


s or renain 


g (~ases (L 


lays) 




Total 
Pending 


Mean 
Age 


Median 




0-90 


91-120 


121-180 


181-365 


366-730 


>730 


Age 


District 16 






















Robeson 


Fel 


384 


202 


124 


102 


7 


4 


323 


108.2 


93.0 




Mis 


151 


62 


44 


33 


5 


2 


297 


112.3 


86.0 


Scotland 


Fel 


135 


60 


44 


69 


36 


1 


345 


152.5 


111.0 




Mis 


63 


16 


4 1 


65 


16 


54 


255 


369. 


226.0 


Dist Totals 


Fel 


519 


262 


168 


171 


43 


5 


1,168 


121.3 


94.0 


% of Total 




44.4% 


22.4% 


14.4% 


14.6% 


3.7% 


0.4% 


100.0% 








Mis 


214 


78 


85 


98 


21 


56 


552 


230.9 


115.0 


% of Total 




38.8% 


14.1% 


15.4% 


17.8% 


3.8% 


10.1% 


100.0% 






District 17A 






















Caswell 


Fe 1 


15 





14 


1 








30 


105.8 


106.0 




Mis 


4 1 





6 


4 








51 


70.5 


30.0 


Rockingham 


Fel 


193 


19 


75 


31 


6 





J 24 


97.2 


56.0 




Mis 


132 


40 


54 


30 


8 





264 


106.3 


88.0 


Dist Totals 


Fel 


208 


19 


89 


32 


6 





354 


98. U 


64.0 


% of Total 




58.8% 


5.4% 


25.1% 


9.0% 


1.7% 


0.0% 


100.0% 








Mis 


173 


40 


60 


34 


8 





315 


100.5 


76.0 


% of Total 




54.9% 


12.7% 


19.0% 


10.8% 


2.5% 


0.0% 


100.0% 






District 17B 






















S tokes 


Fel 


46 


24 





5 








V) 


73.0 


51.0 




Mis 


15 


2 


1 


2 








ZD 


66.1 


40.0 


Surry 


Fel 


I 1 )!; 


2 


22 


13 





4 


197 


113.6 


70.0 




Mis 


73 


2 


2 


7 


2 





86 


71.5 


50.5 


Dist Totals 


Fel 


202 


26 


22 


13 





4 


272 


102.4 


59.0 


% of Total 




74.3% 


9.6% 


8.1% 


6.6% 


0.0% 


1.5% 


100.0% 








Mis 


88 


4 


3 


9 


2 





106 


70.5 


50.0 


% of Total 




83.0% 


3.8% 


2.8% 


8.5% 


1.9% 


0.0% 


100.0% 






District 13 






















Guilford 


Fel 


569 


175 


123 


279 


145 


21 


1,312 


174.8 


100.0 


% of Total 




43.4% 


13.3% 


9.4% 


21.3% 


11.1% 


1.6% 


100.0% 








Mis 


77 


29 


10 


11 


7 


1 


135 


113.2 


72.0 


% of Total 




57.0% 


21.5% 


7.4% 


8.1% 


5.2% 


0.7% 


100.0% 






District 19A 






















Cabarrus 


Fel 


150 


33 


64 


22 


7 





276 


99.3 


79.0 




Mis 


130 


28 


15 


32 


14 


2 


221 


122.0 


55.0 


Rowan 


Fel 


56 


11 


8 


14 


29 





118 


180.3 


95.5 




Mis 


61 


3 


9 


9 


10 


1 


93 


115.0 


49.0 


Dist Totals 


Fel 


206 


44 


72 


36 


36 





394 


123.6 


79.0 


% of Total 




52.3% 


11.2% 


18.3% 


9.1% 


9.1% 


0.0% 


100.0% 








Mis 


191 


31 


24 


41 


24 


3 


314 


119.9 


55.0 


% of Total 




60.8% 


9.9% 


7.6% 


13.1% 


7.6% 


1.0% 


100.0% 






District 19B 






















Montgomery 


Fel 


23 


3 


4 


21 


2 


2 


55 


183.2 


147.0 




Mis 


69 


9 


7 


23 


23 


27 


138 


281.3 


125.0 


Randolph 


Fel 


160 


55 


76 


64 


J2 





387 


138.1 


101.0 




Mis 


94 


47 


40 


88 


29 


3 


301 


183.2 


141.0 


Dist Totals 


Fel 


183 


58 


80 


85 


34 


2 


442 


143.7 


106.0 


% of Total 




41.4% 


13.1% 


18.1% 


19.2% 


7.7% 


0.5% 


100.0% 








Mis 


163 


56 


47 


111 


52 


30 


459 


217.1 


141.0 


% of Total 




35.5% 


12.2% 


10.2% 


24.2% 


11.3% 


6.5% 


100.0% 







130 



AGES OF FELONY (FEL) AND MISDEMEANOR (MIS) 
CASES PENDING IN THE SUPERIOR COURTS 

Ages of Cases Pending June 30, 1988 









Age 


s or fendii 


ig cases (i 


Jays) 




Total 
Pending 


Mean 
Age 


Median 




0-90 


91-120 


121-180 


181-365 


366-730 


>730 


Age 


District 20 






















Anson 


Fel 


19 


12 


10 


8 


1 





50 


110.3 


98.0 




Mis 


44 


19 


19 


7 


7 





96 


107.8 


99.0 


Moore 


Fel 


66 


42 


11 


34 


10 


1 


164 


144.9 


115.0 




Mis 


94 


15 


23 


14 


9 


1 


156 


127.0 


86.0 


Richmond 


Fel 


72 


2 


48 


2 


3 


2 


129 


101.6 


73.0 




Mis 


69 


17 


5 


11 


i 





110 


114.9 


56.0 


Stanly 


Fel 


64 


56 


23 


25 


4 





172 


121.0 


92.0 




Mis 


62 


5 


11 


16 








94 


94.4 


66.0 


Union 


Fel 


76 


12 


18 


13 


2 


15 


136 


253.3 


73.0 




Mis 


68 


22 


29 


12 


16 


42 


189 


364.2 


122.0 


Dist Totals 


Fel 


297 


124 


110 


82 


20 


18 


651 


150.0 


92.0 


% of Total 




45.6% 


19.0% 


16.9% 


12.6% 


3.1% 


2.8% 


100. 0% 








Mis 


337 


78 


87 


60 


40 


43 


645 


186.9 


86.0 


% of Total 




52.2% 


12.1% 


13.5% 


9.3% 


6.2% 


6.7% 


100.0% 






District 21 






















Forsy th 


Fel 


507 


144 


94 


78 


46 





869 


106.7 


78.0 


% of Total 




58.3% 


16.6% 


10.8% 


9.0% 


5.3% 


0.0% 


100.0% 








Mis 


480 


46 


79 


55 


12 


2 


674 


80.9 


55.0 


% of Total 




71.2% 


6.8% 


11.7% 


8.2% 


1.8% 


0.3% 


100.0% 






District 22 






















Alexander 


Fel 


16 


2 


1 


7 


5 





31 


163.8 


86.0 




Mis 


21 





10 


5 








3b 


103.8 


86.0 


Davidson 


Fel 


109 


12 


22 


8 


9 


5 


165 


117.3 


36.0 




Mis 


79 


18 


4 


b 


2 


1 


110 


77.9 


52.0 


Davie 


Fel 


27 


14 


7 


2 


5 





5 5 


117.1 


91.0 




Mis 


51 


b 


13 


lb 








86 


102.0 


69.0 


Iredell 


Fel 


9U 


4b 


44 


12 


4 





19b 


98.4 


97.0 




Mis 


136 


18 


36 


19 


4 





213 


89.6 


65.0 


Dist Totals 


Fel 


242 


74 


74 


29 


23 


5 


447 


112.2 


80.0 


% of Total 




54.1% 


16.6% 


16.6% 


6.5% 


5.1% 


1.1% 


100.0% 








Mis 


287 


42 


63 


46 


6 


1 


445 


90.3 


65.0 


% of Total 




64.5% 


9.4% 


14.2% 


10.3% 


1.3% 


0.2% 


100.0% 






District 23 






















Alleghany 


Fel 


3 


4 


3 


4 


1 


1 


16 


231.1 


177.0 




Mis 


10 


1 


1 


4 





2 


18 


199.2 


78.0 


Ashe 


Fel 


8 





18 


6 


15 





47 


241.3 


161.0 




Mis 


17 


b 


12 


17 


11 





6 3 


218.2 


143.0 


Wilkes 


Fel 


63 


7 


9 


13 


1 


2 


9 5 


116.5 


64.0 




Mis 


58 


10 


15 


33 


6 


4 


12b 


164.5 


101.0 


Yadkin 


Fel 


58 


8 


5 











71 


43.7 


36.0 




Mis 


30 


4 


2 


4 








40 


71.3 


43.0 


Dist Totals 


Fel 


132 


19 


35 


23 


17 


3 


229 


127.6 


64.0 


% of Total 




57.6% 


8.3% 


15.3% 


10.0% 


7.4% 


1.3% 


100.0% 








Mis 


115 


21 


30 


58 


17 


6 


247 


165.7 


97.0 


X of Total 




46.6% 


8.5% 


12.1% 


23.5% 


6.9% 


2.4% 


100.0% 






District 24 






















Avery 


Fel 


lb 


9 


15 


3 


2 


2 


47 


167.1 


112.0 




Mis 


2 


2 


3 


3 


4 





14 


227.7 


189.5 


Madison 


Fel 


15 


12 





34 


6 





6/ 


233.0 


322.0 




Mis 


7 





4 


1 


9 





21 


242.2 


170.0 


Mitchell 


Fel 


7 


10 


24 


3 


13 





57 


209.6 


163.0 




Mis 


20 


1 


5 


2 


1 





29 


96.1 


45.0 


Watauga 


Fel 


22 


110 


11 


9 


121 





273 


261.5 


128.0 




Mis 


13 


5 


3 


4 


12 





42 


216.0 


112.0 


Yancey 


Fel 


6 





15 


25 


3 





49 


212.6 


192.0 




Mis 


3 


5 


3 


5 





i 


17 


198.0 


128.0 


Dist Totals 


Fel 


66 


141 


65 


74 


145 


2 


493 


237.8 


161.0 


% of Total 




13.4% 


28.6% 


13.2% 


15.0% 


29.4% 


0.4% 


100.0% 








Mis 


50 


13 


18 


15 


26 


1 


123 


191.1 


113.0 


% of Total 




40.7% 


10.6% 


14.6% 


12.2% 


21.1% 


0.8% 


100.0% 







131 



AGES OF FELONY (FEL) AND MISDEMEANOR (MIS) 
CASES PENDING IN THE SUPERIOR COURTS 

Ages of Cases Pending June 30, 1988 









AgC 


i ui renmn 


g cases (L 


»ays; 




Total 
Pending 


Mean 
Age 


Median 




0-90 


91-120 


121-180 


181-365 


366-730 


>730 


Age 


District 25 






















Burke 


Fel 


135 


13 


53 


137 


41 


16 


395 


228.7 


162.0 




Mis 


102 


30 


75 


76 


20 


18 


32 1 


240.7 


140.0 


Caldwell 


Fel 


161 


51 


49 


34 


7 


3 


305 


109.1 


79.0 




Mis 


115 


30 


40 


23 


14 


1 


223 


116.4 


78.0 


Catawba 


Fel 


158 


97 


71 


178 


182 


19 


705 


253.9 


198.0 




Mis 


193 


65 


46 


69 


62 


12 


447 


137.7 


104.0 


Dist Totals 


Fel 


454 


161 


173 


349 


230 


38 


1,405 


217.9 


143.0 


% of Total 




32.3% 


11.5% 


12.3% 


24.8% 


16.4% 


2.7% 


100.0% 








Mis 


410 


125 


161 


168 


96 


31 


991 


138.8 


111.0 


% of Total 




41.4% 


12.6% 


16.2% 


17.0% 


9.7% 


3.1% 


100.0% 






District 26 






















Mecklenburg 


Fel 


632 


137 


218 


134 


62 


22 


1,205 


136.7 


78.0 


% of Total 




52.4% 


11.4% 


18.1% 


11.1% 


5.1% 


1.8% 


100.0% 








Mis 


282 


97 


69 


78 


47 


6 


579 


143.8 


91.0 


% of Total 




48.7% 


16.8% 


11.9% 


13.5% 


8.1% 


1.0% 


100.0% 






District 27A 






















Gaston 


Fel 


258 


54 


30 


44 


6 





392 


89.7 


58.0 


% of Total 




65.8% 


13.8% 


7.7% 


11.2% 


1.5% 


0.0% 


100.0% 








Mis 


228 


49 


67 


70 


15 


7 


436 


127.1 


81.5 


% of Total 




52.3% 


11.2% 


15.4% 


16.1% 


3.4% 


1.6% 


100.0% 






District 27B 






















Cleveland 


Fel 


64 


16 


24 


20 


3 


1 


128 


130.6 


89.0 




Mis 


31 


8 


6 


10 


1 


1 


57 


123.3 


73.0 


Lincoln 


Fel 


22 


3 


6 


26 


8 


7 


72 


265.5 


212.0 




Mis 


28 


2 


21 


21 


3 


3 


78 


182.9 


154.0 


Dlst Totals 


Fel 


86 


19 


30 


46 


11 


8 


200 


179.1 


112.0 


% of Total 




43.0% 


9.5% 


15.0% 


23.0% 


5.5% 


4.0% 


100.0% 








Mis 


59 


10 


27 


31 


4 


4 


135 


159.8 


100.0 


% of Total 




43.7% 


7.4% 


20.0% 


23.0% 


3.0% 


3.0% 


100.0% 






District 28 






















Buncombe 


FeL 


215 


29 


15 


17 


4 


2 


282 


73.4 


57.0 


X of Total 




76.2% 


10.3% 


5.3% 


6.0% 


1.4% 


0.7% 


100.0% 








Mis 


43 


5 


3 


2 








53 


62.0 


49.0 


% of Total 




81.1% 


9.4% 


5.7% 


3.8% 


0.0% 


0.0% 


100.0% 






District 29 






















Henderson 


Fel 


85 


64 


19 


20 


17 


1 


206 


139.3 


112.0 




Mis 


23 


11 


1 


2 


2 





39 


97.8 


66.0 


McDowell 


Fel 


39 


26 


28 


2 


7 


3 


105 


138.5 


119.0 




Mis 


44 


8 


5 


5 


4 





66 


101.3 


48.0 


Polk 


Fel 


9 


5 


10 


13 


11 


3 


51 


311.8 


325.0 




Mis 


9 





11 


11 


4 





35 


188.8 


129.0 


Rutherford 


Fel 


77 


4 


19 


25 


13 


2 


140 


145.1 


60.0 




Mis 


122 


6 


13 


16 


4 


3 


164 


94.8 


45.0 


Transylvania 


Fel 


160 


19 


14 


17 


10 


9 


229 


135.6 


24.0 




Mis 


8 


4 


2 


8 


3 





25 


193.0 


135.0 


Dist Totals 


Fel 


370 


118 


90 


77 


58 


18 


731 


151.2 


85.0 


X of Total 




50.6% 


16.1% 


12.3% 


10.5% 


7.9% 


2.5% 


100.0% 








Mis 


206 


29 


32 


42 


17 


3 


329 


113.9 


58.0 


X of Total 




62.6% 


8.8% 


9.7% 


12.8% 


5.2% 


0.9% 


100.0% 







132 



AGES OF FELONY (FEL) AND MISDEMEANOR (MIS) 
CASES PENDING IN THE SUPERIOR COURTS 

Ages of Cases Pending June 30, 1988 









Age 


i or rendu 


ig Cases (I 


)ays) 




Total 
Pending 


Mean 
Age 


Median 




0-90 


91-120 


121-180 


181-365 


366-730 


>730 


Age 


omelet 3Q 






















Cherokee 


Fel 


23 


2 


20 


61 


18 


18 


142 


379.2 


205.0 




His 


6 


4 


5 


8 


5 


26 


54 


677.6 


460.5 


Clay 


Fel 


1 


3 





4 








8 


171.8 


178.0 




Mis 


6 


1 











1 


8 


lt>8.8 


3.0 


Graham 


Fel 


10 





4 


13 








2 7 


157.2 


126.0 




Mis 


11 


1 


2 


7 


3 


2 


26 


257.8 


134.5 


Haywood 


Pel 


73 


32 


22 


19 


6 


9 


161 


200.8 


92.0 




Mis 


44 


7 


1 


4 


2 





58 


81.9 


60.0 


Jackson 


Fel 


70 





74 


32 


4 





130 


130.6 


129.0 




Mis 


11 





9 


5 





1 


26 


157.6 


143.0 


Macon 


Fel 


7 





21 


13 


7 


2 


50 


271.2 


150.0 




Mis 


16 


3 





2 





4 


25 


287.1 


57.0 


Swain 


Fel 


16 


33 


1 


2 








52 


94.2 


101.0 




Mis 


2 





1 


6 


1 





10 


267.1 


315.0 


Dlst Totals 


Fel 


200 


70 


142 


144 


35 


29 


620 


215.7 


125.5 


% of Total 




32.3% 


11.3% 


22.9% 


23.2% 


5.6% 


4.7% 


100.0% 








Mis 


96 


16 


18 


32 


11 


34 


207 


306.0 


94.0 


% of Total 




46.4% 


7.7% 


8.7% 


15.5% 


5.3% 


16.4% 


100.0% 






State Totals 


Fel 


10,572 


2,536 


2,669 


2,727 


1,367 


270 


20,141 


136.9 


79.0 


X of Total 




5?. 5% 


12.6% 


13.3% 


13.5% 


6.8% 


1.3% 


100.0% 








Mis 


5,885 


1,241 


1,317 


1,540 


610 


320 


10,913 


145.4 


78.0 


% of Total 




53.9% 


11.4% 


12.1% 


14.1% 


5.6% 


2.9% 


100.0% 







133 



AGES OF FELONY (FEL) AND MISDEMEANOR (MIS) 
CASES DISPOSED IN THE SUPERIOR COURTS 

Ages of Cases Disposed July 1, 1987 - June 30, 1988 











Ages 


or msposi 


id LUSCS (I 


Jays) 




Total 

Disposed 


Mean 
Age 


Median 




0-90 


91-120 


121-180 


181-365 


366-730 


>730 


Age 


District 


1 






















Camden 




Fel 


15 





1 


11 








27 


120.1 


49.0 






Mis 


24 


3 


9 


22 


3 





61 


159.9 


143.0 


Chowan 




Fel 


61 


5 


7 


15 





1 


39 


111.2 


71.0 






Mis 


101 


8 


7 


11 








127 


62.5 


55.0 


Currl tuck 


Fel 


33 


8 


17 


6 








64 


85.8 


85.0 






Mis 


86 


17 


23 


14 


2 





142 


97.1 


71.0 


Dare 




Fel 


100 


35 


32 


68 


7 





242 


134.6 


101.0 






Mis 


378 


65 


61 


49 


9 





562 


77.8 


56.5 


Gates 




Fel 


23 


7 


9 


3 





1 


43 


129.8 


98.5 






Mis 


30 


12 


21 


12 








• 75 


120.0 


108.0 


Pasquota 


nk 


Fel 


109 


45 


31 


23 


4 


1 


218 


117.0 


91.0 






Mis 


389 


64 


92 


41 


1 





587 


73.8 


57.0 


Perqulma 


ns 


Fel 


10 


4 


2 


5 








21 


106.1 


96.0 






Mis 


63 


16 


18 


15 


1 





113 


99.6 


89.0 


Dlst Totals 


Fel 


351 


104 


99 


141 


11 


3 


709 


120.1 


91.0 


% of 


Total 




49.5% 


14.7% 


14.0% 


19.9% 


1.6% 


0.4% 


100.0% 










Mis 


1,071 


185 


231 


164 


16 





1,667 


83.3 


63.0 


% of 


Total 




64.2% 


11.1% 


13.9% 


9.8% 


1.0% 


0.0% 


100.0% 






District 


2 






















Beaufort 




Fel 


226 


47 


63 


50 


8 





394 


99.9 


77.0 






Mis 


219 


55 


36 


29 


4 





343 


84.5 


65.0 


Hyde 




Fel 


12 


5 


4 


7 





b 


34 


379.6 


120.5 






Mis 


9 


3 


6 











18 


79.1 


85.5 


Martin 




Fel 


87 


8 


33 


16 


3 





147 


101.5 


80.0 






Mis 


29 


9 


18 


15 


3 





74 


139.9 


115.5 


Tyrrell 




Fel 


11 


2 


1 


Id 


1 





31 


161.1 


181.0 






Mis 


22 


15 


7 


4 


1 





49 


107.9 


106.0 


Washington 


Fel 


116 


13 


4 


16 


1 





150 


83.2 


63.0 






Mis 


49 


17 


5 


11 


2 





84 


103.8 


84.5 


Dlst To 


tals 


Fel 


452 


75 


105 


105 


13 


6 


756 


112.0 


72.0 


% of 


Total 




59.8% 


9.9% 


13.9% 


13.9% 


1.7% 


0.8% 


100.0% 










Mis 


328 


99 


72 


59 


10 





568 


96.4 


77.0 


% of 


Total 




57.7% 


17.4% 


12.7% 


10.4% 


1.8% 


0.0% 


100.0% 






District 


3 






















Carteret 




Fel 


258 


47 


64 


35 








404 


74.3 


38.0 






Mis 


122 


11 


12 


7 





1 


153 


61.6 


42.0 


Craven 




Fel 


301 


73 


65 


97 


6 


4 


546 


108.7 


84.0 






Mis 


451 


39 


31 


28 


4 





553 


58.2 


43.0 


Pamlico 




Fel 


12 


8 


10 


5 


4 





39 


155.0 


112.0 






Mis 


lb 


6 


7 


6 








35 


95.1 


105.0 


Pitt 




Fel 


635 


170 


247 


175 


68 





1,295 


130.2 


93.0 






Mis 


751 


176 


157 


215 


57 





1,356 


112.5 


80.5 


Dlst Totals 


Fel 


1,206 


298 


386 


312 


78 


4 


2,284 


115.6 


86.0 


% of 


Total 




52.8% 


13.0% 


16.9% 


13.7% 


3.4% 


0.2% 


100.0% 










Mis 


1,340 


232 


207 


256 


61 


1 


2,097 


94.2 


66.0 


% of 


Total 




63.9% 


11.1% 


9.9% 


12.2% 


2.9% 


0.0% 


100.0% 






District 


4 






















Duplin 




Fel 


608 


30 


5 


b 








649 


31.6 


20.0 






Mis 


46 


4 


1 











51 


34.2 


22.0 


Jones 




Fel 


75 


5 


23 


11 








114 


62.1 


8.0 






Mis 


7 


5 


4 


2 








18 


109.8 


92.0 


Onslow 




Fel 


1,256 


118 


101 


40 


3 


2 


1,520 


54.9 


39.0 






Mis 


395 


47 


29 


11 








482 


53.2 


43.0 


Sampson 




Fel 


269 


6 


5 


12 


4 





296 


41.9 


27.0 






Mis 


65 


2 














67 


31.4 


21.0 


Dlst Tc 


tals 


Fe! 


2,208 


159 


134 


69 


7 


2 


2,579 


47.9 


33.0 


% of 


Total 




85.6% 


6.2% 


5.2% 


2.7% 


0.3% 


0.1% 


100.0% 










Mis 


513 


58 


34 


13 








618 


50.9 


39.0 


% of 


Total 




83.0% 


9.4% 


5.5% 


2.1% 


0.0% 


0.0% 


100.0% 







134 



AGES OF FELONY (FEL) AND MISDEMEANOR (MIS) 
CASES DISPOSED IN THE SUPERIOR COURTS 

Ages of Cases Disposed July 1, 1987 - June 30, 1988 









Ages 


or Dispose 


d Cases (1 


Jays) 




Total 
Disposed 


Mean 
Age 


Median 




0-90 


91-120 


121-180 


181-365 


366-730 


>730 


Age 


District 5 






















New Hanover 


Fel 


1,340 


273 


327 


314 


21 


2 


2,282 


97.4 


75.0 




Mis 


574 


97 


137 


63 


2 





873 


83.4 


66.0 


Pender 


Fel 


140 


21 


31 


152 


21 





415 


159.8 


133.0 




Mis 


40 


21 


13 


7 


1 


1 


88 


112.6 


110.0 


Dist Totals 


Fel 


1,480 


299 


408 


466 


42 


2 


2,697 


107.0 


79.0 


% of Total 




.54.9% 


11.1% 


15.1% 


17.3% 


1.6% 


0.1% 


100.0% 








Mis 


614 


118 


155 


70 


3 


1 


961 


86.1 


69.0 


% of Total 




63.9% 


12.3% 


16.1% 


7.3% 


0.3% 


0.1% 


100.0% 






District 6 






















Bertie 


Fel 


35 


13 


21 


39 


3 





161 


123.4 


81.0 




Mis 


20 


3 


8 


2 


1 





34 


97.3 


82.0 


Halifax 


Fel 


306 


32 


57 


27 


16 


2 


440 


82.7 


42.0 




Mis 


95 


7 


38 


27 


6 





173 


103.6 


76.0 


Hertford 


Fel 


114 


16 


5 


29 


2 





166 


83.9 


45.0 




Mis 


53 


42 


19 


12 








126 


95.4 


111.0 


Northampton 


Fel 


30 


10 


14 


6 


3 





113 


82.6 


80.0 




Mis 


22 


2 


3 


6 








33 


92.8 


73.0 


Dlst Totals 


Fel 


585 


71 


97 


101 


24 


2 


880 


90.4 


49.0 


% of Total 




66.5% 


8.1% 


11.0% 


11.5% 


2.7% 


0.2% 


100.0% 








Mis 


190 


54 


68 


47 


7 





366 


99.2 


85.0 


% of Total 




51.9% 


14.8% 


18.6% 


12.8% 


1.9% 


0.0% 


100.0% 






District 7 






















Edgecombe 


Fel 


195 


22 


36 


45 


15 





313 


101.3 


55.0 




Mis 


167 


20 


14 


31 


12 


1) 


244 


96.9 


62.0 


Nash 


Fel 


588 


65 


33 


15 


4 





705 


62.8 


53.0 




Mis 


249 


20 


19 


17 


1 


1 


307 


60.9 


35.0 


Wilson 


Fel 


365 


38 


57 


66 


14 





540 


78.4 


45.0 




Mis 


L44 


7 


26 


23 


6 





206 


93.1 


60.5 


Dist Totals 


Fel 


1,148 


125 


126 


126 


33 





1,558 


76.0 


52.0 


% of Total 




73.7% 


8.0% 


8.1% 


8.1% 


2.1% 


0.0% 


100.0% 








Mis 


560 


47 


59 


71 


19 


1 


757 


81.3 


49.0 


% of Total 




74.0% 


6.2% 


7.8% 


9.4% 


2.5% 


0.1% 


100.0% 






District 8 






















Greene 


Fel 


50 


15 


2 


16 


1 





84 


82.0 


77.0 




Mis 


45 


7 


3 


5 








60 


77.3 


62.5 


Lenoir 


Fel 


230 


30 


29 


34 


10 





333 


85.3 


47.0 




Mis 


397 


42 


36 


33 


6 





514 


70.0 


47.0 


Wayne 


Fel 


346 


49 


82 


55 


19 





551 


103.8 


74.0 




Mis 


410 


76 


95 


94 


22 





697 


98.7 


76.0 


Dist Totals 


Fel 


626 


94 


113 


105 


30 





968 


95.5 


70.0 


% of Total 




64.7% 


9.7% 


11.7% 


10.8% 


3.1% 


0.0% 


100.0% 








Mis 


852 


125 


134 


132 


28 





1,271 


86.1 


59.0 


% of Total 




67.0% 


9.8% 


10.5% 


10.4% 


2.2% 


0.0% 


100.0% 






District 9 






















Franklin 


Fel 


113 


25 


46 


50 


1 





235 


116.9 


92.0 




Mis 


136 


44 


22 


13 


5 


1 


221 


99.5 


77.0 


Granville 


Fel 


164 


27 


14 


46 








251 


97.8 


72.0 




Mis 


75 


11 


18 


21 


8 


3 


136 


150.5 


81.0 


Person 


Fel 


119 


35 


33 


42 


4 


4 


237 


129.6 


90.0 




Mis 


78 


27 


15 


26 


11 


6 


163 


180.8 


91.0 


Vance 


Fel 


131 


53 


44 


55 


6 


18 


307 


201.4 


101.0 




Mis 


157 


62 


44 


40 


13 


3 


319 


131.1 


92.0 


Warren 


Fel 


39 


13 


12 


15 


3 





82 


110.6 


96.0 




Mis 


43 


18 


11 


19 


4 





95 


122.3 


98.0 


Dist Totals 


Fel 


566 


153 


149 


208 


14 


22 


1,112 


138.2 


90.0 


% of Total 




50.9% 


13.8% 


13.4% 


18.7% 


1.3% 


2.0% 


100.0% 








Mis 


489 


162 


110 


119 


41 


13 


934 


134.2 


86.5 


% of Total 




52.4% 


17.3% 


11.8% 


12.7% 


4.4% 


1.4% 


100.0% 







135 



AGES OF FELONY (FEL) AND MISDEMEANOR (MIS) 
CASES DISPOSED IN THE SUPERIOR COURTS 

Ages of Cases Disposed July 1, 1987 - June 30, 1988 









Ages 


or Dispose 


d Cases (1 


Jays) 




Total 
Disposed 


Mean 
Age 


Median 




0-90 


91-120 


121-180 


181-365 


366-730 


>730 


Age 


District 10 






















Wake 


Fel 


2,022 


537 


634 


841 


390 


87 


4,511 


166.2 


104.0 


% of Total 




44.8% 


11.9% 


14.1% 


18.6% 


3.6% 


1.9% 


100.0% 








Mis 


1,266 


133 


115 


175 


60 


13 


1,762 


97.3 


52.0 


% of Total 




71.9% 


7.5% 


6.5% 


9.9% 


3.4% 


0.7% 


100.0% 






District 11 






















Harnett 


Fel 


19 7 


41 


24 


17 


2 





281 


76.4 


58.0 




Mis 


83 


11 


8 





2 





104 


57.3 


40.0 


Johnston 


Fel 


264 


20 


30 


10 








. 324 


64.4 


53.0 




Mis 


329 


4b 


61 


11 








447 


58.7 


45.0 


Lee 


Fel 


222 


34 


28 


9 


6 





299 


73.1 


61.0 




Mis 


160 


26 


4 


8 








198 


64.7 


56.0 


Dist Totals 


Fel 


683 


95 


82 


36 


8 





904 


71.0 


57.0 


% of Total 




75.6% 


10.5% 


9.1% 


4.0% 


0.9% 


0.0% 


100.0% 








Mis 


572 


83 


73 


19 


2 





749 


60.1 


49.0 


% of Total 




76.4% 


11.1% 


9.7% 


2.5% 


0.3% 


0.0% 


100.0% 






District 12 






















Cumberland 


Fel 


1,081 


189 


283 


280 


85 


6 


1,924 


112.0 


78.0 




Mis 


161 


26 


19 


22 


6 


1 


235 


88.8 


55.0 


Hoke 


Fel 


37 


16 


31 


43 


3 





150 


130.7 


128.0 




Mis 


43 


2 


9 


9 


4 


2 


69 


129.6 


55.0 


Dist Totals 


Fel 


1,138 


205 


314 


323 


88 


6 


2,074 


113.3 


80.0 


% of Total 




54.9% 


9.9% 


15.1% 


15.6% 


4.2% 


0.3% 


100.0% 








Mis 


204 


28 


28 


31 


10 


3 


304 


98.1 


55.0 


% of Total 




67.1% 


9.2% 


9.2% 


10.2% 


3.3% 


1.0% 


100.0% 






District 13 






















Bladen 


Fel 


39 


27 


28 


12 


16 


3 


125 


188.8 


108.0 




Mis 


57 


15 


20 


12 


2 





10 6 


100.5 


87.0 


Brunswick 


Fel 


229 


85 


123 


82 


44 


1 


564 


151.4 


101.0 




Mis 


56 


31 


26 


20 


13 


1 


147 


161.4 


111.0 


Columbus 


Fel 


30 


21 


59 


75 


18 





203 


186.3 


145.0 




Mis 


97 


32 


28 


53 


15 


1 


226 


140.7 


109.0 


Dist Totals 


Fel 


298 


133 


210 


169 


78 


4 


892 


164.6 


126.5 


% of Total 




33.4% 


14.9% 


23.5% 


18.9% 


8.7% 


0.4% 


100.0% 








Mis 


210 


78 


74 


85 


30 


2 


479 


138.2 


106.0 


% of Total 




43.8% 


16.3% 


15.4% 


17.7% 


6.3% 


0.4% 


100.0% 






District 14 






















Durham 


Fel 


942 


188 


275 


335 


99 


41 


1,880 


149.9 


90.0 


% of Total 




50.1% 


10.0% 


14.6% 


17.8% 


5.3% 


2.2% 


100.0% 








Mis 


194 


33 


44 


57 


35 


35 


398 


242.0 


94.0 


% of Total 




48.7% 


8.3% 


11.1% 


14.3% 


8.8% 


8.8% 


100.0% 






District 15A 






















Alamance 


Fel 


606 


143 


166 


112 


15 


3 


1,045 


98.5 


72.0 


% of Total 




58.0% 


13.7% 


15.9% 


10.7% 


1.4% 


0.3% 


100.0% 








Mis 


454 


66 


61 


58 


10 


2 


651 


85.9 


62.0 


% of Total 




69.7% 


10.1% 


9.4% 


8.9% 


1.5% 


0.3% 


100.0% 






District 15B 






















Chatham 


Fel 


81 


20 


39 


37 


11 


1 


189 


149.4 


113.0 




Mis 


34 


4 


12 


39 


2 





91 


148.4 


147.0 


Orange 


Fel 


308 


150 


120 


93 


5 


1 


677 


112.1 


99.0 




Mis 


100 


14 


12 


14 








140 


75.7 


55.0 


Dist Totals 


Fel 


389 


170 


159 


130 


16 


2 


866 


120.3 


100.0 


% of Total 




44.9% 


19.6% 


18.4% 


15.0% 


1.8% 


0.2% 


100.0% 








Mis 


134 


18 


24 


53 


2 





231 


104.4 


80.0 


% of Total 




58.0% 


7.8% 


10.4% 


22.9% 


0.9% 


0.0% 


100.0% 







136 



AGES OF FELONY (FEL) AND MISDEMEANOR (MIS) 
CASES DISPOSED IN THE SUPERIOR COURTS 

Ages of Cases Disposed July 1, 1987 - June 30, 1988 









Ages 


or Dliposi 


id Cases (l 


Joys) 




Total 
Disposed 


Mean 
Age 


Median 




0-90 


91-120 


121-180 


181-365 


366-730 


>730 


Age 


District 16 






















Robeson 


Fel 


710 


244 


164 


148 


i; 


1 


1,284 


102.7 


84.0 




Mis 


335 


88 


no 


73 


15 


4 


675 


109.1 


80.0 


Scotland 


Fel 


45 


47 


32 


102 


13 


S 


244 


199.3 


175.0 




Mis 


34 


31 


18 


30 


17 


1 


131 


188.0 


122.0 


Dlst Totals 


Fel 


755 


291 


196 


250 


30 


6 


1,528 


118.1 


91.0 


% of Total 




49. 45! 


19.0% 


12.8% 


16.4% 


2.0* 


0.4% 


100.0% 








Mis 


419 


119 


123 


103 


32 


5 


806 


121.9 


86.0 


% of Total 




52.0% 


14.8% 


15.9% 


12.8% 


4.0% 


0.6% 


100.0% 






District 17A 






















Caswell 


Fel 


65 


13 


17 


7 


3 





10 3 


89.1 


71.0 




Mis 


131 


12 


21 


23 





1 


188 


88.4 


71.5 


Rockingham 


Fel 


469 


132 


195 


196 


7 


1 


1,000 


119.9 


96.0 




Mis 


399 


99 


156 


150 


14 


3 


821 


112.7 


94.0 


Dist Totals 


Fel 


534 


145 


212 


203 


10 


1 


1,105 


117.0 


91.0 


% of Total 




48.3% 


13.1% 


19.2% 


18.4% 


0.9% 


0.1% 


100.0% 








Mis 


530 


111 


177 


173 


14 


4 


1,009 


108.2 


83.0 


% of Total 




52.5% 


11.0% 


17.5% 


17.1% 


1.4% 


0.4% 


100.0% 






District 17B 






















Stokes 


Fel 


135 


23 


50 


49 


4 





261 


118.5 


80.0 




Mis 


116 


10 


44 


28 


1 





199 


104.9 


69.0 


Surry 


Fel 


244 


123 


35 


37 


2 





441 


91.6 


81.0 




Mis 


417 


79 


46 


65 


7 





614 


83.3 


64.0 


Dist Totals 


Fel 


379 


146 


85 


36 


6 





702 


101.6 


80.5 


% of Total 




54.0% 


20.8% 


12.1% 


12.3% 


0.9% 


0.0% 


100.0% 








Mis 


533 


89 


90 


93 


8 





813 


88.6 


65.0 


% of Total 




65.6% 


10.9% 


11.1% 


11.4% 


1.0% 


0.0% 


100.0% 






District 18 






















Guilford 


Fel 


1,776 


403 


705 


738 


401 


86 


4,109 


169.8 


111.0 


% of Total 




43.2% 


9.8% 


17.2% 


18.0% 


9.8% 


2.1% 


100.0% 








Mis 


290 


28 


73 


159 


46 


11 


607 


162.7 


101.0 


% of Total 




47.8% 


4.6% 


12.0% 


26.2% 


7.6% 


1.8% 


100.0% 






District 19A 






















Cabarrus 


Fel 


426 


139 


179 


81 


19 





844 


102.6 


90.0 




Mis 


227 


87 


114 


131 


13 


1 


573 


133.4 


110.0 


Rowan 


Fel 


478 


91 


176 


128 


27 





900 


109.7 


83.0 




Mis 


352 


90 


36 


55 


44 


7 


584 


119.0 


64.0 


Dist Totals 


Fel 


904 


230 


355 


209 


46 





1,744 


106.3 


88.0 


% of Total 




51.8% 


13.2% 


20.4% 


12.0% 


2.6% 


0.0% 


100.0% 








Mis 


579 


177 


150 


186 


57 


8 


1,157 


126.1 


90.0 


% of Total 




50.0% 


15.3% 


13.0% 


16.1% 


4.9% 


0.7% 


100.0% 






District 19B 






















Montgomery 


Fel 


41 


23 


44 


44 


14 


3 


169 


191.1 


154.0 




Mis 


137 


28 


42 


46 


15 





^68 


131.7 


88.0 


Randolph 


Fel 


122 


77 


198 


234 


o9 


12 


712 


202.7 


159.0 




Mis 


340 


92 


109 


156 


42 


3 


742 


135.7 


97.0 


Dist Totals 


Fel 


163 


100 


242 


278 


83 


15 


881 


200.5 


156.0 


% of Total 




18.5% 


11.4% 


27.5% 


31.6% 


9.4% 


1.7% 


100.0% 








Mis 


477 


120 


151 


202 


57 


3 


1,010 


134.6 


97.0 


% of Total 




47.2% 


11.9% 


15.0% 


20.0% 


5.6% 


0.3% 


100.0% 







137 



AGES OF FELONY (FEL) AND MISDEMEANOR (MIS) 
CASES DISPOSED IN THE SUPERIOR COURTS 

Ages of Cases Disposed July 1, 1987 - June 30, 1988 









Ages 


or Disposi 


d cases (i 


Jays) 




Total 
Disposed 


Mean 
Age 


Median 




0-90 


91-120 


121-180 


181-365 


366-730 


>730 


Age 


District 20 






















Anson 


Fel 


118 


12 


12 


13 


3 





160 


82.0 


55.5 




Mis 


2 32 


15 


34 


34 


11 





326 


90.1 


55.0 


Moore 


Fel 


37 3 


a 


9 2 


52 


lb 


3 


509 


105.4 


64.0 




Mis 


247 


40 


51 


48 


6 


2 


394 


98.0 


74.0 


Richmond 


Fel 


4 29 


79 


27 


42 


4 





581 


65.6 


35.0 




Mis 


250 


38 


27 


24 


3 





342 


69.0 


46.0 


Stanly 


Fel 


104 


42 


38 


26 


3 





218 


107.3 


93.0 




Mis 


149 


16 


21 


29 


4 





219 


93.8 


60.0 


Union 


Fe 1 


365 


42 


4b 


69 


10 





532 


91.5 


60.0 




Mis 


»53 


50 


55 


73 


9 


5 


• 545 


103.7 


65.0 


Dlst Totals 


Fel 


1,389 


208 


215 


204 


41 


3 


2,060 


89.0 


64.0 


% of Total 




67.4% 


10.1% 


10.4% 


9.9% 


2.0% 


0.1% 


100.0% 








Mis 


1,231 


159 


183 


208 


33 


7 


1,826 


92.4 


58.0 


% of Total 




67.4% 


8.7% 


10.3% 


11.4% 


1.8% 


0.4% 


100.0% 






District 21 






















Forsyth 


Fel 


1,339 


422 


446 


299 


36 





2,542 


105.1 


86.0 


% of Total 




52.7% 


16.6% 


17.5% 


11.8% 


1.4% 


0.0% 


100.0% 








Mis 


1,455 


239 


117 


160 


40 





2,011 


81.8 


61.0 


% of Total 




72.4% 


11.9% 


5.8% 


8.0% 


2.0% 


0.0% 


100.0% 






District 22 






















Alexander 


Fel 


45 


16 


5 


24 








90 


110.4 


84.5 




Mis 


110 


27 


12 


24 


3 





176 


93.1 


69.0 


Davidson 


Fel 


314 


91 


88 


87 


17 


I 


599 


116.1 


83.0 




Mis 


404 


S3 


53 


52 


6 





563 


81.2 


61.0 


Davie 


Fel 


2fa 


7 


10 


8 








51 


100.6 


35.0 




Mis 


112 


18 


22 


6 








158 


69.3 


49.0 


Iredell 


Fel 


230 


30 


63 


3b 


7 





416 


112.8 


82.0 




Mis 


488 


56 


4 3 


31 


2 


1 


621 


64.3 


46.0 


Dist Totals 


Fel 


615 


144 


166 


205 


24 


2 


1,156 


113.8 


83.0 


% of Total 




53.2% 


12.5% 


14.4% 


17.7% 


2.1% 


0.2% 


100.0% 








Mis 


1,114 


154 


130 


113 


11 


1 


1,523 


74.5 


53.0 


% of Total 




73.1% 


10.1% 


8.5% 


7.4% 


0.7% 


0.1% 


100.0% 






District 23 






















Alleghany 


Fel 


8 








3 


4 


1 


lb 


283.9 


184.0 




Mis 


21 


6 


4 


12 


10 





53 


184.6 


118.0 


Ashe 


Fel 


la 


8 


8 


11 


19 


10 


7^ 


336.3 


224.0 




Mis 


8 


14 


7 


13 


8 


2 


52 


235.4 


143.0 


Wilkes 


Fel 


74 


79 


67 


78 


39 


8 


345 


208.0 


144.0 




Mis 


192 


37 


60 


66 


31 


7 


3'9 3 


148.8 


93.0 


Yadkin 


Fel 


84 


33 


14 


12 


3 





1-46 


90.0 


76.0 




Mis 


77 


9 


25 


8 








119 


87.6 


69.0 


Dist Totals 


Fel 


184 


120 


89 


104 


65 


19 


581 


196.8 


120.0 


% of Total 




31.7% 


20.7% 


15.3% 


17.9% 


11.2% 


3.3% 


100.0% 








Mis 


298 


66 


96 


99 


49 


9 


617 


147.4 


94.0 


% of Total 




48.3% 


10.7% 


15.6% 


16.0% 


7.9% 


1.5% 


100.0% 






District 24 






















Avery 


Fel 


7 


25 


9 


15 


2 





58 


145.1 


113.5 




Mis 


30 


3 


10 


10 








53 


113.8 


85.0 


Madison 


Fel 


11 


7 


9 


9 


5 





41 


197.2 


149.0 




Mis 


4 





2 


3 


1 





10 


195.5 


149.0 


Mitchell 


Fel 


7 


9 


35 


S9 


7 


3 


100 


213.6 


176.5 




Mis 


16 


6 


10 


16 


1 





49 


146.9 


148.0 


Watauga 


Fel 


88 


31 


34 


lb 


17 


2 


188 


142.6 


97.0 




Mis 


24 


7 


14 


22 


6 





7 3 


176.3 


148.0 


Yancey 


Fel 


1 


1 


4 


7 


20 





33 


451.7 


522.0 




Mis 








2 


15 


8 





25 


355.1 


303.0 


Dist Totals 


Fel 


114 


73 


91 


86 


51 


5 


420 


189.5 


127.0 


% of Total 




27.1% 


17.4% 


21.7% 


20.5% 


12.1% 


1.2% 


100.0% 








Mis 


74 


16 


38 


66 


16 





210 


175.9 


148.0 


% of Total 




35.2% 


7.6% 


18.1% 


31.4% 


7.6% 


0.0% 


100.0% 







138 



AGES OF FELONY (FEL) AND MISDEMEANOR (MIS) 
CASES DISPOSED IN THE SUPERIOR COURTS 

Ages of Cases Disposed July 1, 1987 - June 30. 1988 









Ages 


01 DlSpOSt 


■a cases u 


Jays) 




Total 
Disposed 


Mean 
Age 


Median 




0-90 


91-120 


121-180 


181-365 


366-730 


>730 


Age 


District 25 






















Burke 


Fel 


106 


48 


151 


119 


63 


29 


521 


239.4 


154.0 




Mis 


135 


49 


129 


137 


47 





497 


173.4 


150.0 


Caldwell 


Fel 


147 


92 


132 


195 


28 


3 


597 


168.9 


138.0 




Mis 


236 


65 


134 


111 


28 





574 


132.9 


117.0 


Catawba 


Fel 


347 


146 


247 


290 


71 


7 


1,108 


166.2 


140.0 




Mis 


211 


68 


109 


107 


9 3 


13 


601 


205.4 


129.0 


Dist Totals 


Fel 


600 


286 


530 


604 


167 


39 


2,226 


134.0 


146.0 


% of Total 




27.0% 


12.8% 


23.8% 


27.1% 


7.5% 


1.8% 


100.0% 








Mis 


582 


182 


372 


355 


168 


13 


1,672 


171.0 


130.0 


% of Total 




34.8% 


10.9% 


22.2% 


21.2% 


10.0% 


0.8% 


100.0% 






District 26 






















Mecklenburg 


Fel 


1,408 


544 


520 


470 


108 


15 


3,065 


122.8 


94.0 


% of Total 




45.9% 


17.7% 


17.0% 


15.3% 


3.5% 


0.5% 


100.0% 








Mis 


824 


209 


225 


215 


54 


7 


1,534 


115.6 


84.0 


% of Total 




53.7% 


13.6% 


14.7% 


14.0% 


3.5% 


0.5% 


100.0% 






District 27A 






















Gaston 


Fel 


893 


197 


194 


107 


3 


2 


1,396 


80.5 


64.0 


% of Total 




64.0% 


14.1% 


13.9% 


7.7% 


0.2% 


0.1% 


100.0% 








Mis 


371 


98 


98 


109 


24 


2 


702 


115.9 


85.0 


% of Total 




52.8% 


14.0% 


14.0% 


15.5% 


3.4% 


0.3% 


100.0% 






District 27B 






















Cleveland 


Fel 


228 


35 


56 


92 


28 


9 


448 


147.6 


89.0 




Mis 


144 


40 


44 


30 


3 


2 


263 


101.4 


75.0 


Lincoln 


Fel 


152 


37 


52 


44 


12 


5 


302 


121.0 


89.0 




Mis 


3b 


14 


19 


28 


10 


1 


158 


120.6 


76.5 


Dist Totals 


Fel 


380 


72 


108 


136 


40 


14 


750 


136.9 


89.0 


% of Total 




50.7% 


9.6% 


14.4% 


18.1% 


5.3% 


1.9% 


100.0% 








Mis 


230 


54 


63 


58 


13 


3 


421 


108.6 


75.0 


% of Total 




54.6% 


12.8% 


15.0% 


13.8% 


3.1% 


0.7% 


100.0% 






District 28 






















Buncombe 


Fel 


441 


196 


226 


130 


18 





1,011 


117.3 


97.0 


% of Total 




43.6% 


19.4% 


22.4% 


12.9% 


1.8% 


0.0% 


100.0% 








Mis 


448 


33 


105 


19 


4 





609 


71.7 


51.0 


% of Total 




73.6% 


5.4% 


17.2% 


3.1% 


0.7% 


0.0% 


100.0% 






District 29 






















Henderson 


Fel 


102 


33 


48 


80 


9 





272 


145.4 


122.0 




Mis 


111 


24 


42 


30 


14 


1 


222 


120.8 


90.0 


McDowell 


Fel 


207 


38 


57 


49 


14 


5 


370 


120.1 


84.0 




Mis 


103 


26 


61 


23 


9 


5 


227 


133.0 


96.0 


Polk 


Fel 


6 


1 


15 


5 


3 


2 


32 


233.3 


158.0 




Mis 


12 


4 


6 


6 


4 





32 


153.9 


123.0 


Rutherford 


Fel 


194 


63 


59 


73 


25 





414 


134.5 


93.5 




Mis 


136 


74 


59 


43 


15 


4 


331 


138.8 


101.0 


Transylvania 


Fel 


29 


9 


34 


40 


11 


7 


130 


228.0 


157.0 




Mis 


14 


10 


4 


15 


4 


3 


50 


228.5 


140.5 


Dist Totals 


Fel 


538 


144 


213 


247 


62 


14 


1,218 


145.1 


101.0 


% of Total 




44.2% 


11.8% 


17.5% 


20.3% 


5.1% 


1.1% 


100.0% 








Mis 


376 


138 


172 


117 


46 


13 


862 


138.4 


101.0 


% of Total 




43.6% 


16.0% 


20.0% 


13.6% 


5.3% 


1.5% 


100.0% 







139 



AGES OF FELONY (FEL) AND MISDEMEANOR (MIS) 
CASES DISPOSED IN THE SUPERIOR COURTS 

Ages of Cases Disposed July 1, 1987 - June 30, 1988 









/\ge 


s oi uispos 


ea Lases ( 


uays) 




Total 
Disposed 


Mean 

Age 


Median 




0-90 


91-120 


121-180 


181-365 


366-730 


>730 


Age 


District 30 






















Cherokee 


Fel 


123 


12 


42 


22 


33 


12 


244 


168.9 


79.0 




Mis 


38 


7 


21 


19 


6 





91 


144.1 


125.0 


Clay 


Fel 


11 


1 


2 


I 


2 


4 


21 


311.5 


50.0 




Mis 


5 


3 


3 


5 


2 





IS 


165.8 


153.0 


Graham 


Fel 


11 


1 


1 


4 7 








60 


219.7 


280.0 




Mis 


12 


10 


11 


5 


3 


1 


42 


170.5 


119.0 


Haywood 


Fel 


303 


63 


42 


31 


4 


3 


446 


83.4 


58.5 




Mis 


162 


19 


18 


11 


2 





212 


63.9 


38.0 


Jackson 


Fel 


101 


12 


10 


50 


6 





179 


126.0 


90.0 




Mis 


13 


3 


10 


13 





,i 


. 39 


151.6 


133.0 


Macon 


Fel 


53 


12 


33 


16 


5 


1 


122 


149.0 


112.0 




Mis 


29 


5 


7 


9 





1 


51 


115.9 


75.0 


Swain 


Fel 


69 


17 


28 


8 


13 


4 


139 


149.6 


91.0 




Mis 


30 


5 


5 


6 








48 


98.5 


74.0 


Dlst Totals 


Fel 


673 


113 


153 


175 


63 


24 


1,211 


131.8 


84.0 


% of Total 




55.67. 


9.7% 


13.0/. 


14.5% 


5.2% 


2.0% 


100.0% 








Mis 


289 


52 


75 


70 


13 


2 


501 


106.5 


70.0 


% of Total 




57.7% 


10.4% 


15.0% 


14.0% 


2.6% 


0.4% 


100.0% 






State Totals 


Fel 


27,785 


6,688 


8,208 


8,110 


2,200 


429 


53,420 


124.4 


86.0 


% of Total 




52.0% 


12.5% 


15.4% 


15.2% 


4.1% 


0.8% 


100.0% 








Mis 


19,111 


3,563 


3,937 


3,914 


1,019 


159 


31,703 


106.3 


70.0 


% of Total 




60.3% 


11.2% 


12.4% 


12.3% 


3.2% 


0.5% 


100.0% 







140 



PART IV, Section 2 

District Court Division 
Caseflow Data 



The District Court Division 



This section contains data tables and accompanying 
charts depicting the caseflow in 1987-88 of cases filed and 
disposed of in the State's district courts. 

Data are given on four major case classifications in the 
district court division: civil cases, juvenile proceedings, 
criminal cases, and infractions. Civil cases are divided 
into "small claims" cases assigned to magistrates; domes- 
tic relations cases (chiefly concerned with annulments, 
divorces, alimony, custody and support of children); and 
"general civil" cases. Juvenile proceedings are classified 
according to the nature of the offense or condition alleged 
in the petition that initiates the case. District court crimi- 
nal cases are divided into motor vehicle cases (where the 
offense charged is defined in Chapter 20 of the North 
Carolina General Statutes) and non-motor vehicle crimi- 
nal cases. 

Infractions are non-criminal violations of law punisha- 
ble by a fine not to exceed $100 and not punishable by 
imprisonment. This category of cases in the district courts 
was created effective September 1, 1986, when the 
General Assembly decriminalized most minor traffic 
offenses. Prior to September 1, 1986, "infractions" were 
prosecuted as criminal motor vehicle cases. Therefore, for 
purposes of comparing present to past district court crim- 
inal caseloads, criminal motor vehicle caseloads of 1985- 
86 and earlier are substantially coparable to the combined 
motor vehicle and infraction caseloads of 1986-87 amd 
later. (This comparison is not exact, since not all cases 
now prosecuted as infractions were criminal motor vehi- 
cle cases in prior f years. For example, the infraction of 
purchase or possession of alcohol by a person by age 1 9 or 
20 was neither an infraction nor a criminal violation prior 
to September 1, 1986.) 

Magistrates may handle civil, criminal, and infraction 
cases in district court. When the plaintiff in a civil case 
requests, and the amount in controversy does not exceed 
$1,500, the case may be classified as a "small claim" civil 
action and assigned to a magistrate for hearing. In mis- 
demeanor or infraction cases involving alcohol, traffic, 
hunting, fishing, and boating violations, magistrates may 
accept written appearances, waivers of trial or hearing, 
and pleas of guilty or admissions of responsibility, and 
enter judgment in accord with the schedule of fines and 
penalties promulgated by chief district court judges. Also, 
magistrates may accept guilty pleas in other misdemeanor 
cases where the sentence cannot be in excess of 30 days or 
$50 fine; and may hear and enter judgment in worthless 
check cases where the amount involved is $1000 or less, 
and any prison sentence imposed does not exceed 30 days. 

Appeals from magistrates'judgments in civil, criminal, 
and infraction cases are to the district court, with a district 
court judge presiding. 

Consistent with previous years, the pie charts on the 
following page illustrate that district court criminal cases 
filed and disposed of in the 1987-88 year greatly out- 
numbered civil cases. Motor vehicle criminal cases and 
infractions accounted for over fifty percent of total filings 
and dispositions, and the non-motor vehicle criminal 
cases accounted for about twenty-five percent. As in past 



years, the greatest portion of district court civil filings and 
dispositions were small claims referred to magistrates. 

The large volume categories of infraction, criminal 
motor-vehicle, and civil magistrate cases are not reported 
to AOC by case file numbers. Therefore, it is not possible 
to obtain, by computer processing, the numbers of pend- 
ing cases as of a given date or the ages of cases pending 
and ages of cases at disposition. These categories of cases 
are processed through the courts faster than any others, 
thus explaining the decision not to allocate personnel and 
computer resource to reporting these cases in the detail 
that is provided for other categories of cases. 

Also, juvenile proceedings and hearings on commit- 
ment or recommitment of persons to the State's mental 
hospital facilities are not reported to AOC by case file 
numbers. 

Two tables are provided on juvenile proceedings: 
offenses and conditions alleged, and numbers of adjudi- 
catory hearings held. 

Data on district court hearings for mental hospital 
commitments and recommitments is reported in Part III, 
"Cost and Case Data on Representation of Indigents." 

Ages of district court cases pending on June 30, 1988, 
and ages of cases disposed of during 1987-88 are reported 
for the domestic relations, general civil and magistrate 
appeal/ transfer, and criminal non-motor vehicle case 
categories. 

The tables for domestic relations and general civil and 
magistrate appeal/ transfer cases show that the median 
age of such cases which were pending on June 30, 1988, 
was 155 and 182 days, respectively, compared with a 
median age of 154 days for domestic relations and 167 
days for general civil and magistrate appeal/ transfer 
cases pending on June 30, 1987. At the time of disposition 
during 1987-88, the median age of domestic relations 
cases was 5 1 days, and the median age for general civil and 
magistrate/ transfer cases was 1 10 days, compared with a 
median age of 53 days at the time of disposition for 
domestic relations cases and 109 days for civil and magis- 
trate appeal/ transfer cases during 1986-87. 

For district court non-motor vehicle criminal cases, the 
median age for cases pending on June 30, 1988, was 57 
days compared with a median age of 54 days for cases 
pending on June 30, 1 987. The median age of cases in this 
category at the time of disposition during 1987-88 was 30 
days compared with a median age of 29 days at the time of 
disposition during 1986-87. 

The statewide total district court filings during 1987-88, 
not including juvenile cases and mental hospital com- 
mitment hearings, was 2,004,447 cases, compared with 
1,868,985 during 1987-88, an increase of 135,462 (7.2%). 
Criminal motor vehicle cases and infraction cases together 
account for much of this increase. There were 1 ,028,252 of 
these cases filed during 1987-88, compared with 975,488 
during 1986-87, an increase of 52,764 cases (5.4%). There 
was an increase of 46,579 cases (9.9%) in the non-motor 
vehicle criminal case category. 

There also was an increase (10.2%) in district court civil 
case filings (not including civil license revocation cases), 



143 



from a total of 364,271 in 1986-87 to 401,387 in 1987-88. The changes from year-to-year in the individual case 

Most of this increase was in civil magistrate filings, from categories are not unusual. The over-all trend for total 

247,455 cases in 1986-87 to 277,336 cases in 1987-88, an district court case filings over the past several years has 

increase of 12. 1%. During 1987-88, compared to 1986-87, been upward. This upward trend is reflected in the total 

filings of domestic relations cases increased by 5.9% and 1987-88 district court case filings, 
filings of general civil cases increased by 6.6%. 



144 



FILINGS AND DISPOSITIONS IN THE DISTRICT COURTS 

July 1, 1987 - June 30, 1988 

FILINGS 



Criminal Motor Vehicle 
(419,407) 



Infraction (608,845) 




Criminal Non-Motor Vehicle 
(514,710) 



Domestic Relations (71,646) 
General Civil (52,405) 



Civil Magistrate (277,336) 



3.0% Civil License Revocation 
(60,098) 



DISPOSITIONS 



Criminal Motor Vehicle 
(401,855) 




Criminal Non-Motor Vehicle 
(500,529) 



Infraction 
(592,532) 



Domestic Relations (68,507) 
General Civil (49,597) 



Civil Magistrate (266,355) 



Criminal motor vehicle and infraction cases together 
comprise more than half the district court caseload. The 
60,098 civil license revocations in the upper chart are 
automatic, 10-day driver license suspensions imposed on 



drivers arrested on suspicion of impaired driving whose 
breath tests showed a blood alcohol content of 0.10 or 
more. They are counted only at filing, and do not appear 
on the disposition chart. 



145 



FILING AND DISPOSITION TRENDS IN THE DISTRICT COURTS 

1978-79 - 1987-88 



2.5 



M 

I 
1 
L 

I 
O 

N 
S 



o 

F 



C 

A 
S 
E 

S 



2.0 



1.5 



1.0 



0.5 



0.0 




78-79 79-80 



80-81 



81-82 



82-83 83-84 



84-85 



85-86 86-87 



87-88 



This graph includes all civil, infraction, and criminal case 
filings and dispositions in the district courts for the last 
decade. During the ten year period depicted on this graph, 



filings and dispositions have increased in all but one year. 
In the 1987-88 fiscal year the number of filing increased by 
7.2%, and dispositions increased 8.4% over 1986-87. 



146 



T 
H 
O 
U 

s 

A 
N 
D 
S 



O 
F 



C 
A 
S 
E 
S 



450 



400 



350 



300 



250 



200 



150 



100 



50 



FILING AND DISPOSITION TRENDS OF CIVIL CASES 
IN THE DISTRICT COURTS 

1978-79 — 1987-88 



Filings 




Civil Magistrate Cases 



Dispositions 



Filings 



Dispositions 



Domestic and Other Cases 



78-79 79-80 80-81 81-82 82-83 83-84 84-85 85-86 86-87 87- 



From 1986-87 to 1987-88, district court civil filings Civil magistrate filings increased by 12.1%. 

increased by 10.2% and dispositions increased by 9.6%. 



147 



CIVIL (NON-MAGISTRATE) CASES IN THE DISTRICT COURTS 

July 1, 1987 - June 30, 1988 



80 



70 



60 



50 



40 



30 



20 



10 



T 
H 
O 
U 

s 

A 

N 
I) 
S 

O 
F 

C 

A 
S 
E 

s 



Begin Pending 

Filings 

Dispositions 

i End pendi »g 



52,405 



49,597 



31,451 



34,259 



gas™ 






m 






[iV-.'-.V.'J.-t 



S2sa£ 



GENERAL CIVIL AND CIVIL 
MAGISTRATE APPEALS/TRANSFERS 



71,646 



68,507 



27,190 



30,329 



m 
is 






m 

■ 

pig 



mm 

g --Vt nil 



DOMESTIC RELATIONS 



From 1986-87 to 1987-88, filings of domestic relations 
caces increased by 5.9% and dispositions of domestic rela- 



tions cases increased by 3.6%. General civil filings increased 
by 6.6% and dispositions incresed by 8.3%. 



148 



FILINGS OF CIVIL (NON-MAGISTRATE) CASES 
IN THE DISTRICT COURTS 

July 1, 1987 - June 30, 1988 



T 
H 
O 

U 

s 

A 
N 
D 
S 



o 

F 



C 

A 
S 
E 

S 



60 
50 
45 
40 
35 
30 
25 
20 
15 
10 




URESA IV-D CHILD NON IV-D 

SUPPORT CHILD 

SUPPORT 



OTHER 



GENERAL MAGISTRATE 
CIVIL APPEALS/ 

TRANSFERS 



% of Filing 



4.7% 



DOMESTIC RELATIONS 

12.1% 11.2% 



29.8% 



38.9% 



3.3% 



"URESA" stands for the Uniform Reciprocal Enforce- 
ment of Support Act, and refers to actions enforcing child 
support orders entered by judges in one state by the courts 
in another. "IV-D Child Support" refers to actions 
initiated by counties or the Department of Human 



Resources to collect child support owed to social services 
clients. "Non IV-D Child Support" actions are initiated 
by custodial parents themselves. The "Other" category 
includes civil actions such as annulment, divorce, equita- 
ble distribution of property, and alimony. 



149 



CASELOAD INVENTORY FOR CIVIL (NON-MAGISTRATE) 
CASES IN THE DISTRICT COURTS 

July 1, 1987 - June 30, 1988 



Domestic Relations Cases 



General Civil and Magistrate Appeals/Transfers 





Begin 










End 


Begin 










End 




Pending 








%Caseload 


Pending 


Pending 








% Caseload 


Pending 




7/1/87 


Filings 


Total 


Disposed 


Disposed 


6/30/88 


7/1/87 


Filings 


Total 


Disposed 


Disposed 


6/30/88 


District 1 


























Camden 


11 


24 


35 


17 


48.6% 


18 


13 


11 


24 


10 


41.7% 


14 


Chowan 


o2 


198 


260 


201 


7 7.3% 


59 


5 7 


59 


116 


64 


55.2% 


52 


Currituck 


36 


12 1 


157 


103 


65.6% 


54 


61 


/l 


132 


71 


53.8% 


61 


Dare 


82 


217 


299 


20 1 


67.2% 


98 


123 


2 15 


• 338 


177 


52.4% 


161 


Gates 


21 


59 


80 


56 


70.0% 


24 


10 


22 


32 


19 


59.4% 


13 


Pasquotank 


11 i 


382 


495 


344 


69.5% 


151 


113 


133 


246 


138 


56.1% 


108 


Perquimans 


49 


101 


150 


86 


57.3% 


64 


34 


41 


75 


45 


60.0% 


30 



District Totals 374 1,102 



1,476 



1,008 



68.3% 



468 



41 1 



552 



963 



524 



54.4% 



439 



District 2 



Beaufort 


150 


398 


548 


354 


64.6% 


194 


131 


160 


291 


160 


55.0% 


131 


Hyde 


15 


45 


60 


40 


66.7% 


20 


21 


17 


38 


27 


71.1% 


11 


Martin 


94 


240 


334 


224 


67.1% 


no 


34 


68 


102 


65 


63.7% 


37 


Tyrrell 


7 


25 


32 


25 


78.1% 


7 


17 


7 


24 


16 


66.7% 


8 


Washington 


41 


216 


257 


193 


75.1% 


64 


19 


53 


72 


47 


65.3% 


25 


District Totals 


307 


924 


1,231 


836 


67.9% 


395 


222 


305 


527 


315 


59.8% 


212 


District 3 



























Carteret 
Craven 
Pamlico 
Pitt 



16/ 


605 


772 


569 


73.7% 


203 


365 


1,055 


1,420 


1,013 


71.3% 


407 


30 


84 


114 


92 


80.7% 


22 


263 


856 


1,119 


854 


76.3% 


265 



149 


334 


483 


251 


660 


911 


12 


29 


41 


299 


819 


1,118 



332 

656 

31 

769 



68.7% 
72.0% 
75.6% 
68.8% 



151 
255 

10 
34 9 



District Totals 



825 



2,600 



3,425 



2,528 



73.8% 



39 7 



711 



1,842 2,553 



1.7* 



70.0% 



765 



District 4 


























Duplin 


148 


402 


550 


402 


73.1% 


148 


93 


14 5 


238 


137 


57.6% 


101 


Jones 


25 


90 


115 


69 


60.0% 


46 


48 


48 


96 


47 


49.0% 


49 


Onslow 


918 


1,826 


2,744 


1,854 


67.6% 


890 


686 


847 


1,533 


973 


63.5% 


560 


Sampson 


144 


525 


669 


536 


80.1% 


133 


127 


325 


452 


314 


69.5% 


138 


District Totals 


1,235 


2,843 


4,078 


2,861 


70.2% 


1,217 


954 


1,365 


2,319 


1,471 


63.4% 


848 


District 5 


























New Hanover 


5 54 


1,673 


2,227 


1,521 


68.3% 


706 


921 


1,798 


2,719 


1,639 


60.3% 


1,080 


Pender 


101 


251 


352 


237 


67.3% 


115 


85 


234 


319 


194 


60.8% 


125 



District Totals 655 1,924 



2,579 



1,7 58 



.2;: 



821 



1,006 



2,032 



3,038 



1,333 



60.3% 1,205 



District 6 




























Bertie 




85 


252 


337 


270 


80.1% 


67 


4o 


75 


121 


34 


69.4% 


37 


Halifax 




10 9 


950 


1,119 


893 


79.8% 


226 


77 


196 


273 


18 7 


68.5% 


36 


Hertford 




9 1 


381 


472 


375 


79.4% 


97 


73 


166 


2 39 


181 


75.7% 


58 


Northamptor 


i 


54 


224 


278 


207 


74.5% 


71 


26 


74 


100 


DO 


60.0% 


40 


District 


Totals 


199 


1,807 


2,206 


1,745 


79.1% 


461 


222 


511 


733 


512 


69.8% 


221 


District 7 




























Edgecombe 




218 


595 


813 


6 24 


76.8% 


189 


104 


275 


379 


219 


57.8% 


160 


Nash 




221 


1,043 


1,264 


995 


78.7% 


269 


241 


659 


900 


647 


71.9% 


253 


Wilson 




215 


700 


915 


751 


82.1% 


164 


141 


480 


621 


412 


66.3% 


209 


District 


Totals 


654 


2,338 


2,992 


2,370 


79.2% 


622 


486 


1,414 


1,900 


1,278 


67.3% 


622 


District 8 




























Greene 




32 


38 


120 


99 


82.5% 


21 


16 


9} 


109 


70 


64.2% 


39 


Lenoir 




244 


741 


985 


672 


68.2% 


313 


223 


439 


662 


428 


64.7% 


234 


Wayne 




518 


1,447 


1,965 


1,433 


72.9% 


532 


461 


779 


1,240 


709 


57.2% 


531 



District Totals 



794 



2,276 



3,070 



2,204 



71.8% 



866 



7 00 



1,311 2,011 



1,207 60.0% 



804 



150 



CASELOAD INVENTORY FOR CIVIL (NON-MAGISTRATE) 
CASES IN THE DISTRICT COURTS 

July 1, 1987 - June 30, 1988 

Domestic Relations Cases General Civil and Magistrate Appeals/Transfers 





Begin 
Pending 








% Caseload 


End 
Pending 


Begin 
Pending 








%Caseload 


End 
Pending 




7/1/87 


Filings 


Total 


Disposed 


Disposed 


6/30/88 


7/1/87 


Filings 


Total 


Disposed 


Disposed 


6/30/88 


District 9 


























Franklin 


102 


335 


437 


334 


76.4% 


10 3 


77 


115 


192 


119 


62.0% 


73 


Granville 


97 


32 1 


418 


301 


72.0% 


117 


40 


145 


185 


108 


58.4% 


77 


Person 


69 


286 


355 


291 


82.0% 


64 


89 


106 


195 


132 


67.7% 


63 


Vance 


152 


560 


712 


546 


76.7% 


166 


115 


207 


322 


189 


58.7% 


133 


Warren 


62 


215 


277 


202 


72.9% 


75 


36 


77 


113 


53 


51.3% 


55 


District Tc 


tals 482 


1,717 


2,199 


1,674 


76.1% 


525 


357 


650 


1,007 


606 


60.2% 


401 


District 10 


























Wake 


2,840 


3,970 


6,810 


3,502 


51.4% 


3,308 


4,092 


6,032 


10,124 


5,803 


57.3% 


4,321 


District 11 


























Harne tt 


222 


714 


936 


698 


74.6% 


238 


203 


575 


778 


497 


63.9% 


281 


Johnston 


309 


935 


1,244 


925 


74.4% 


319 


307 


642 


949 


522 


55.0% 


427 


Lee 


133 


618 


751 


569 


75.8% 


182 


153 


577 


730 


463 


63.4% 


267 



District Totals 664 2,267 2,931 2,192 74.8% 739 663 1,794 2,457 1,482 60.3% 975 

District 12 

Cumberland 2,407 4,751 7,158 4,901 68.5% 2,257 866 1,352 2,218 1,388 62.6% 830 

Hoke 103 284 387 278 71.3% 109 48 105 153 103 67.3% 50 

District Totals 2,510 5,035 7,545 5,179 68.6% 2,366 914 1,457 2,371 1,491 62.9% 880 

District 13 
Bladen 
Brunswick 
Columbus 

District Totals 

District 14 



Durham 




District 


15A 


Alamance 




District 


15B 



02 


295 


357 


275 


77.0% 


82 


139 


246 


385 


225 


58.4% 


160 


231 


501 


782 


410 


52.4% 


372 


566 


519 


1,085 


467 


43.0% 


618 


349 


610 


959 


570 


59.4% 


389 


445 


372 


317 


329 


40.3% 


488 


692 


1,406 


2,098 


1,255 


59.8% 


843 


1,150 


1,137 


2,287 


1,021 


44.6% 


1,266 


948 


1,875 


2,823 


1,706 


60.4% 


1,117 


1,313 


1,788 


3,101 


1,819 


58.7% 


1,282 


309 


1,167 


1,476 


1,125 


76.2% 


351 


314 


732 


1,046 


589 


56.3% 


457 


83 


287 


370 


268 


72.4% 


102 


53 


116 


169 


105 


62.1% 


64 


301 


623 


924 


573 


62.0% 


351 


389 


518 


907 


458 


50.5% 


449 



Chatham 
Orange 

District Totals 384 910 1,294 841 65.0% 453 442 634 1,076 563 52.3% 513 

District 16 

Robeson 237 1,185 1,422 1,109 78.0% 313 471 649 1,120 722 64.5% 398 



237 


1,185 


1,422 


1,109 


78.0% 


313 


130 


355 


485 


347 


71.5% 


138 



Scotland 130 355 485 347 71.5% 138 89 195 284 182 64.1% 102 

District Totals 367 1,540 1,907 1,456 76.4% 451 560 844 1,404 904 64.4% 500 



District 17A 


























Caswell 


53 


142 


195 


158 


81.0% 


37 


25 


70 


95 


59 


62.1% 


36 


Rockingham 


180 


876 


1,056 


829 


78.5% 


227 


104 


541 


645 


394 


61.1% 


251 



District Totals 233 1,018 1,251 987 78.9% 264 129 611 740 453 61.2% 287 

District 17B 

Stokes 38 172 210 144 68.6% 66 76 136 212 148 69.8% 64 

Surry 172 566 738 597 80.9% 141 137 285 422 324 76.8% 98 

District Totals 210 738 948 741 78.2% 207 213 421 634 472 74.4% 162 



151 



CASELOAD INVENTORY FOR CIVIL (NON-MAGISTRATE) 
CASES IN THE DISTRICT COURTS 

July 1, 1987 - June 30, 1988 



Domestic Relations Cases 



Degin End 

Pending %Case!oad Pending 

7/1/87 Filings Total Disposed Disposed 6/30/88 



General Civil and Magistrate Appeals/Transfers 

Begin End 

Pending %Caseload Pending 

7/1/87 Filings Total Disposed Disposed 6/30/88 



District 18 
Guilford 

District 19A 

Cabarrus 

Rowan 

District Totals 

District 19B 



1,921 4,165 6,086 



3,715 61.0% 2,371 3,273 4,770 8,043 



3,911 48.6% 4,132 



219 
233 



1,034 
966 



1,253 
1,199 



965 


77.0% 


288 


352 


469 


821 


981 


81.8% 


218 


308 


558 


866 



430 
590 



452 2,000 2,452 



1,946 



79.4% 



506 



660 1,027 1,687 



Anson 

Moore 

Richmond 

Stanly 

Union 



94 
335 
136 
202 
254 



District Totals 1,021 
District 21 



District 23 

Alleghany 

Ashe 

Wilkes 

Yadkin 

District Totals 

District 24 

Avery 

Madison 

Mitchell 

Watauga 

Yancey 

District Totals 

District 25 
Burke 
Caldwell 
Catawba 



17 

52 

130 

70 



67 
34 
47 
112 
46 

306 



206 

195 
454 



District Totals 855 



District 26 
Mecklenburg 



345 
490 
547 
403 

702 



Forsyth 1,376 2,823 

District 22 

Alexander 

Davidson 

Davie 

Iredell 

District Totals 819 2,442 



88 
197 
585 
225 



269 1,095 



1,828 



134 
139 
121 
283 
123 

300 



764 

774 

1,418 

2,956 
5,224 



439 
825 
683 
605 
956 



2,487 3,508 



4,199 



40 


223 


263 


430 


1,067 


1,497 


68 


214 


282 


281 


938 


1,219 



3,261 



105 
249 
715 
295 

1,364 



201 
173 
168 
395 
169 

1,106 



970 

969 

1,872 

3,811 
7,052 



301 


68.6% 


138 


82 


99 


131 


547 


66.3% 


278 


494 


296 


790 


449 


65.7% 


234 


116 


248 


364 


358 


59.2% 


247 


310 


209 


519 


658 


68.8% 


298 


399 


397 


796 



2,313 65.9% 1,195 1,401 1,249 



2,987 



2,364 



1,085 



777 

708 

703 

1,356 

2,767 
4,511 



72.5% 



897 



722 



79.5% 



279 



488 



70.3% 



73.0% 
72.5% 
72.4% 

72.6% 



64.0% 



329 

262 
266 
516 

1,044 
2,541 



389 



160 
161 
370 

691 



741 



634 



2,650 



71.1% 1,212 1,955 2,522 4,477 



219 


83.3% 


44 


36 


108 


144 


977 


65.3% 


520 


324 


623 


947 


214 


75.9% 


68 


61 


187 


248 


954 


78.3% 


265 


301 


585 


886 



1,503 2,225 



84 


80.0% 


21 


26 


50 


76 


178- 


71.5% 


71 


50 


67 


117 


612 


85.6% 


103 


325 


478 


803 


211 


71.5% 


84 


87 


146 


233 



1,229 



127 


63.2% 


74 


115 


165 


280 


112 


64.7% 


61 


24 


35 


59 


121 


72.0% 


47 


98 


83 


181 


305 


77.2% 


90 


133 


315 


448 


112 


66.3% 


57 


19 


36 


55 



1,023 



342 502 

432 593 

745 1,115 

1,519 2,210 



1,099 



1,449 



895 



4,663 8,383 13,046 



750 

363 
359 
805 

1,527 

7,461 



58.5% 
68.1% 



1,070 63.4% 



65.1% 



72.8% 



73.3% 



72.3% 
60.5% 
72.2% 

69.1% 



341 
276 

617 



Montgomery 


84 


192 


276 


170 


61.6% 


106 


173 


232 


405 


239 


59.0% 


166 


Randolph 


247 


755 


1,002 


710 


70.9% 


292 


137 


355 


492 


326 


66.3% 


166 


District Totals 


331 


947 


1,278 


880 


68.9% 


398 


310 


587 


397 


565 


63.0% 


332 


District 20 



























63 


34.8% 


118 


303 


38.4% 


487 


141 


38.7% 


223 


174 


33.5% 


345 


413 


52.5% 


378 



41.5% 1,551 



2,640 59.0% 1,837 



108 


75.0% 


36 


617 


65.2% 


330 


155 


62.5% 


93 


569 


64.2% 


317 



776 



48 


63.2% 


28 


75 


64.1% 


42 


623 


77.6% 


180 


149 


63.9% 


84 



334 



186 


66.4% 


94 


38 


64.4% 


21 


151 


83.4% 


30 


340 


75.9% 


108 


35 


63.6% 


20 



273 



139 
234 
310 

683 



57.2% 5,585 



152 



CASELOAD INVENTORY FOR CIVIL (NON-MAGISTRATE) 
CASES IN THE DISTRICT COURTS 

July 1, 1987 - June 30, 1988 

Domestic Relations Coses General Civil and Magistrate Appeals/Transfers 





Dc 


gin 










End 


Begin 










End 




Per 


ding 








% Caseload 


Pending 


Pending 








%Cascload 


Pending 




7/1/87 


Filings 


Total 


Disposed 


Disposed 


6/30/88 


7/1/87 


Filings 


Total 


Disposed 


Disposed 


6/30/88 


Olatrlct 27A 




























Jas ton 




707 


2,386 


3,093 


2,261 


7 3. U 


832 


317 


724 


1,041 


668 


64.2% 


373 


District 27B 




























Cleveland 




ill 


1,140 


1,351 


1,115 


32.5% 


236 


34 


341 


425 


321 


75.5% 


104 


Lincoln 




92 


432 


574 


488 


85.)% 


3b 


59 


164 


223 


167 


74.9* 


56 


District Total 


s 


303 


1,522 


1,925 


1,603 


33. V. 


322 


143 


50'5 


648 


483 


75.3% 


160 


District 28 




























Buncombe 




899 


2,074 


2,973 


2,159 


72.6% 


314 


741 


1,415 


2,156 


1,514 


70.2% 


642 


District 29 




























Henderson 




214 


683 


897 


709 


79.0% 


183 


205 


339 


544 


335 


61.6% 


209 


McDowell 




130 


332 


462 


335 


72.5% 


127 


64 


135 


199 


132 


56.3% 


67 


Poltc 




30 


97 


127 


105 


32.7% 


22 


29 


31 


60 


44 


73.3% 


16 


Rutherford 




130 


533 


683 


464 


67.4% 


224 


i<> 


146 


226 


137 


60.6% 


39 


Transylvania 




128 


232 


360 


259 


71.9% 


101 


140 


131 


271 


192 


70.8% 


79 


District Total 


s 


652 


1,382 


2,534 


1,872 


73.9% 


o62 


518 


732 


1,300 


840 


64.6% 


460 


District 30 




























Cherokee 




68 


171 


239 


163 


63. 2% 


70 


U 


63 


31 


u0 


74.1% 


21 


Clay 




17 


70 


37 


60 


69.0% 


27 


9 


26 


35 


19 


54.3% 


16 


Graham 




36 


78 


114 


91 


79.3% 


23 


18 


30 


48 


31 


64.6% 


17 


Haywood 




229 


484 


713 


503 


70.5% 


210 


135 


177 


312 


184 


59.0% 


123 


Jackson 




94 


197 


291 


211 


72.5% 


80 


54 


150 


204 


143 


70.1% 


" 61 


Macon 




78 


192 


270 


172 


63.7% 


93 


56 


133 


194 


105 


54.1% 


89 


Swain 




47 


94 


141 


99 


70.2% 


42 


31 


23 


59 


47 


79.7% 


12 


District Total 


s 


569 


1,286 


1,355 


1,299 


70.0% 


556 


321 


o!2 


9 33 


539 


63.1% 


344 


State Totals 


27 


,190 


71,646 


98,336 


63,507 


69.3% 


30,329 


31,451 


52,405 


83,856 


49,597 


59.1% 


34,259 



153 



MANNER OF DISPOSITION OF CIVIL 
(NON-MAGISTRATE) CASES IN THE DISTRICT COURTS 

July 1, 1987 - June 30, 1988 



Voluntary 
Dismissal 
(20,998) 



Judge's Final 

Order/ Judgment Without 

Trial 

(24,709) 




Trial by Judge 
(45,875) 



Clerk 
(18,575) 



Other 
(7,363) 



Trial by Jury 
(584) 



Most civil cases in the district courts are disposed of by 
judges, either before trial or with a bench (non-jury) trial. 
The "other" category includes actions such as removal to 



federal court or an order from another state closing a 
Uniform Reciprocal Enforcement of Support Case. 



154 



MANNER OF DISPOSITION OF CIVIL (NON-MAGISTRATE) 
CASES IN THE DISTRICT COURTS* 

July 1, 1987 - June 30, 1988 















Judge's Final 














Order or 








Triul by 


Trial by 


Voluntary 


Judgment 








Jury 


Judge 


Dismissal 


without Trial 


District 


1 












Camden 




Gen 


i) 


l 


! 


I 






Dom 





7 


i 


5 


Chowan 




Gen 





10 


25 


3 






Dom 





90 


19 


85 


Currl tuc 


k 


Gen 


1 


I 1 


14 


5 






Dom 





55 


13 


26 


Dare 




Gen 





11 


73 


ju 






Dom 





3 


25 


137 


Gates 




Gen 


1 





i 


1 






Dom 


11 


16 


J 


23 


Pasquotank 


Gen 


1 


22 


34 


11 






Dom 





208 


31 


92 


Perquimans 


Gen 


1 


6 


24 


7 






Dom 





45 


7 


31 


Dlst Totals 


Gen 


4 


5 3 


136 


53 


% of 


Total 




0.8% 


12.0% 


35.5% 


11.1% 






Dom 


11 


430 


106 


421 


% of 


Total 




1.1% 


42. 7 I 


10.5% 


41.8% 


District 


2 












Beaufort 




Gen 


1 


20 


4) 


24 






Dom 


1 


183 


23 


113 


Hyde 




Gen 





I 


10 


8 






Dom 








1 


36 


rtartln 




Gen 





12 


1* 


4 






Dom 





71 


21 


106 


Tyrrell 




Gen 


1 


1 


9 


5 






Dom 











2 5 


Washington 


Gen 


1 


3 


2 3 


3 






Dom 





73 


5 


106 


Dlst Totals 


Gen 


3 


37 


112 


46 


% of 


Total 




1.0% 


11.7% 


35.6% 


14.6% 






Dom 


1 


332 


30 


391 


% of 


Total 




0.1% 


39.7% 


6.0% 


46.3% 


District 


3 












Carteret 




Gen 


3 


49 


115 


59 






Dom 





339 


30 


79 


Craven 




Gen 


1 


41 


195 


100 






Dom 


17 


545 


63 


203 


Pamlico 




Gen 





3 


10 


11 






Dom 





36 


3 


4J 


Pitt 




Gen 


1 


95 


261 


348 






Dom 





671 


45 


35 


Dlst Totals 


Gen 


5 


133 


581 


513 


% of 


Total 




0.3% 


10.5% 


32.5% 


29. OX 






Dom 


17 


1,641 


141 


357 


% of 


Total 




0.7% 


64.9% 


5.6% 


14.1% 


District 


4 












Duplin 




Gen 


2 


lb 


$9 


20 






Dom 


2 


140 


20 


231 


Jones 




Gen 








4 


32 






Dom 








8 


51 


Onslow 




Gen 


2 


247 


188 


31 






Dom 


13 


1,401 


109 


70 


Sampson 




Gen 


7 


31 


170 


4 






Dom 


8 


2 19 


64 


188 


Dist Tc 


tals 


Gen 


11 


294 


401 


87 


% of 


Total 




0.7% 


20.0% 


27.3% 


5.9% 






Dom 


23 


1,760 


201 


340 


% of 


Total 




0.8% 


61.5% 


7.0% 


18.9% 



Clerk 



Other 



5 


J 


1 


1 


21 


5 


1 


4 


3 


30 





4 


5 4 


4 





11 


; 


2 





1 


61 


9 


1 


12 


6 


1 





2 


162 


51 


30.9% 


9.7% 


5 


35 


0.5% 


3.5% 


5d 


8 


17 


7 





2 





3 


26 


4 


1 


25 














9 


4 





9 


99 


13 


31.4% 


5.7% 


13 


44 


2.2% 


5.3% 


36 


20 


3 


68 


253 


61 


7 


173 


4 


3 





13 


2 


62 


1 


102 


350 


146 


19.6% 


8.2% 


11 


361 


0.4% 


14.3% 


3d 


2 





9 


6 


5 


3 


7 


271 


234 


3 


258 


39 


13 


2 


55 


424 


254 


28.8% 


17.3% 


3 


329 


0.3% 


11.5% 



Total 
Disposed 

10 

I? 

u4 

201 

71 

103 

17/ 

201 

19 

56 

133 

344 

45 

86 

524 
100.0% 
1,008 
100.0% 



160 

354 
27 
40 
65 

224 
16 
25 
47 

193 

315 
100.0% 

836 
100.0% 



332 

569 

656 

1,013 

31 

92 

769 

854 

1,788 
100.0% 
2,528 
100.0% 



137 

402 

47 

69 

973 

1,854 

314 

536 

1,471 

100.0% 

2,861 

100.0% 



♦Cases covered In this table are general civil and appeals/ transfers from magistrates to judges, all 
Identified as (GEN), and Domestic Relations (DOM) cases. 



155 



MANNER OF DISPOSITION OF CIVIL (NON-MAGISTRATE) 
CASES IN THE DISTRICT COURTS* 

July 1, 1987 - June 30, 1988 



District 5 



Franklin 



Granville 



Person 



Vance 



Warren 



Gen 
Oom 
Gen 
Dom 
Gen 
Dom 
Gen 
Dom 
Gen 
Dom 



Trial by 
Jury 



Trial by 
Judge 



Voluntary 
Dismissal 



Judge's Final 

Order or 

Judgment 

without Trial 



Clerk 



14 
9b 

23 

122 
45 

262 
44 

263 
10 
3b 



41 
Jl 
43 
17 

40 
24 
43 
37 
20 
12 



12 

193 

9 

61 

3 



2 

211 

13 

100 



39 

3 
23 
64 
40 


09 

2 
14 





Other 



13 
9 
9 

37 
2 


2b 

28 

4 



Total 
Disposed 



New Hanover 


Gen 


14 


224 


505 


175 


594 


127 


1,639 




Dom 


4 


-tM 


90 


476 


4 


96 


1,521 


Pender 


Gen 


2 


U 


32 


19 


^^ 


3 


194 




Dom 


2 


101 


16 


103 





10 


237 


Dlst Totals 


Gen 


16 


233 


537 


194 


668 


130 


1,333 


X of Total 




0.9% 


13.0% 


32.0% 


10.6/. 


36.4% 


7.1% 


100.04 




Dom 


6 


952 


106 


584 


4 


106 


1,758 


% of Total 




0.3% 


54. 2% 


6.0% 


33.2* 


0.2% 


6.0% 


100.0% 


District 6 


















Bertie 


Gen 


6 


9 


22 


j 


40 


1 


34 




Dom 


1 


8 3 


17 


159 


3 


7 


270 


Halifax 


Gen 


3 


49 


50 


3b 


4) 





187 




Dom 


1 


235 


2b 


b07 


1 


23 


893 


Hertford 


Gen 


2 


14 


15 


57 


72 


1 


131 




Dom 





150 


22 


193 


2 


3 


375 


Northampton 


Gen 





15 


8 





34 


3 


60 




Dom 


1 


173 


7 


2 





19 


207 


Dlst Totals 


Gen 


11 


37 


115 


99 


195 


5 


512 


X of Total 




2.1% 


17.0% 


22.5% 


19.3% 


38.1% 


1.0% 


100.0% 




Dom 


3 


646 


72 


966 


6 


52 


1,745 


% of Total 




0.2% 


37.0% 


4.1% 


55.4% 


0.3% 


3.0% 


100.0% 


District 7 


















Edgecombe 


Gen 





21 


77 


24 





37 


219 




Dom 


4 


284 


39 


250 


1 


4o 


624 


Nash 


Gen 


5 


73 


180 


105 


280 


4 


647 




Dom 


2 


547 


30 


405 


1 


10 


995 


Wilson 


Gen 


4 


4 3 


135 


54 


155 


16 


412 




Dom 


3 


422 


42 


243 


7 


29 


751 


Dlst Totals 


Gen 


9 


142 


392 


133 


495 


57 


1,278 


X of Total 




0.7% 


11.1% 


30. 7 X 


14.32 


38.7% 


4.5% 


100.0% 




Dom 


9 


1,253 


111 


903 


9 


85 


2,370 


% of Total 




0.4% 


52.9% 


4.7% 


38.1% 


0.4% 


3.6% 


100.0% 


District 8 


















Greene 


Gen 


1 





11 


44 


8 


6 


70 




Dom 





1 


4 


30 





14 


99 


Lenoir 


Gen 


9 


40 


125 


85 


169 





423 




Dom 


2 


402 


6i 


194 


4 


2 


672 


Wayne 


Gen 


8 


99 


258 


37 


262 


45 


709 




Dom 


5 


842 


136 


334 


12 


54 


1,433 


Dlst Totals 


Gen 


18 


139 


394 


166 


439 


51 


1,207 


% of Total 




1.5% 


11.5% 


32.6% 


13.8% 


36.4% 


4.2% 


100.0% 




Dom 


7 


1,245 


253 


608 


16 


70 


2,204 


X of Total 




0.3% 


56.5% 


11.7% 


27.6% 


0.7% 


3.2% 


100.0% 


District 9 



















119 
334 
103 

301 
132 
291 
189 
546 
58 
202 



Dlst Totals Gen 4 136 192 

X of Total 0.7% 22.4% 31.7% 

Dom 2 834 126 

% of Total 0.1% 49.8% 7.5% 



39 

6.4% 

565 

33.8% 



185 

30.5% 

69 

4.1% 



50 
8.3% 

78 
4.7% 



606 
100.0% 
1,674 
100.0% 



♦Cases covered In this table are general civil and appeals/transfers from magistrates to judges, all 
Identified as (GEN), and Domestic Relations (DOM) cases. 



156 



MANNER OF DISPOSITION OF CIVIL (NON-MAGISTRATE) 
CASES IN THE DISTRICT COURTS* 

July 1, 1987 - June 30, 1988 



District 10 



Chatham Gen 
Dom 

Orange Gen 
Dom 



Trial by 
Jury 



Trial by 
Judge 



Voluntary 
Dismissal 



Judge's Final 

Order or 

Judgment 

without Trial 



Clerk 



13 
150 
US 
344 



47 

14 

130 

39 



7 

33 

2 5 

177 



24 

3 

186 

3 



Other 



4 
17 

1 
9 



Total 
Disposed 



Wake 


Gen 


29 


443 


1,471 


755 


2,895 


205 


5,803 


X of Total 




J. 5% 


7.7% 


25.3% 


13.0/. 


49.9% 


3.5% 


100.0% 




Dom 





2,145 


190 


912 


3 


252 


3,502 


X of Total 




0.0% 


61.3% 


5.4% 


26.0% 


0.1% 


7.2% 


100.0% 


District 11 


















Harnett 


Gen 


5 


5 7 


249 


72 


114 





497 




Dom 


1 


306 


79 


296 


7 


9 


698 


Johnston 


Gen 


7 


3 


130 


150 


177 


5 


522 




Dom 


3 


30 3 


107 


493 


6 


6 


925 


Lee 


Gen 


5 


35 


133 


52 


133 





463 




Dom 





300 


73 


13V 


1 


1 


569 


Dist Totals 


Gen 


17 


95 


617 


274 


474 


5 


1,482 


% of Total 




1.15! 


6.4% 


41.6% 


18.5"<i 


32.0% 


0.3% 


100.0% 




Dom 


4 


909 


264 


933 


14 


18 


2,192 


% of Total 




0.2% 


41.5% 


12.0% 


44.3% 


0.6% 


0.8% 


100.0% 


District 12 


















Cumberland 


Gen 


8 


253 


423 


63 


462 


174 


1,388 




Dom 


1 


2,613 


370 


1,095 


5 


317 


4,901 


Hoke 


Gen 





25 


42 





36 





103 




Dom 





100 


32 


35 





61 


278 


Dist Totals 


Gen 


3 


233 


465 


63 


493 


174 


1,491 


% of Total 




0.5% 


19.0% 


31.2% 


4.2% 


33.4% 


11.7% 


100.0% 




Dom 


1 


2,713 


402 


1,180 


5 


878 


5,179 


% of Total 




0.0% 


52.4% 


7.3% 


22.3% 


0.1% 


17.0% 


100.0% 


District 13 


















Bladen 


Gen 


7 


26 


10 1 


1/ 


62 


12 


225 




Dom 


1 


125 


lb 


124 


I 


3 


275 


Brunswick 


Gen 


3 


34 


242 


41 


91 


4 


467 




Dom 





201 


43 


15-; 





3 


410 


Columbus 


Gen 


14 


60 


109 


37 


39 


20 


329 




Dom 


1 


399 


62 


105 





3 


570 


Dist Totals 


Gen 


26 


170 


452 


95 


242 


36 


1,021 


% of Total 




2.5% 


16.7% 


44.3% 


9.3% 


23.7% 


3.5% 


100.0% 




Dom 


2 


725 


126 


337 


1 


14 


1,255 


% of Total 




0.2% 


57.3% 


10.0% 


30. 8% 


0.1% 


1.1% 


100.0% 


District 14 


















Durham 


Gen 


3 


160 


516 


167 


752 


221 


1,319 


% of Total 




0.2% 


3.8% 


28.4% 


9.2% 


41.3% 


12.1% 


100.0% 




Dom 





1,074 


95 


393 


2 


142 


1,706 


% of Total 




0.0% 


63.0% 


5.6% 


23. 0% 


0.1% 


8.3% 


100.0% 


District 15A 


















Alamance 


Gen 


7 


81 


202 


35 


227 


37 


589 


% of Total 




1.2% 


13.8% 


34.3% 


5.9% 


33.5% 


6.3% 


100.0% 




Dom 


3 


725 


88 


246 


28 


35 


1,125 


% of Total 




0.3% 


64.4% 


7.8% 


21.9% 


2.5% 


3.1% 


100.0% 


District 15B 



















105 
268 
458 

573 



Dist Totals Gen 6 

% of Total 1.1% 

Dom 2 

% of Total 0.2% 



133 
23.6% 

494 
53.7% 



177 

31.4% 

53 

6.3% 



32 

5.7% 

260 

30.9% 



210 
37.3% 
6 
0.7% 



5 
0.9% 

26 
3.1% 



563 
100.0% 

841 
100.0% 



*Cases covered in this table are general civil and appeals/transfers from magistrates to judges, all 
identified as (GEN), and Domestic Relations (DOd) cases. 



157 



MANNER OF DISPOSITION OF CIVIL (NON-MAGISTRATE) 
CASES IN THE DISTRICT COURTS* 

July 1, 1987 - June 30, 1988 



District 16 



Montgomery 
Randolph 



Gen 
Dom 
Gen 
Oom 



Trial by 
Jury 



Trial by 
Judge 



Voluntary 
Dismissal 



Judge's Final 

Order or 

Judgment 

without Trial 



Clerk 



2 b 
L61 

45 
375 



99 

6 

90 

57 



19 

3 

16 

195 



95 


151 
11 



Other 







16 

71 



Total 
Disposed 



Robeson 


Gen 




5 


L30 


235 


19 


201 


132 


722 




Dom 







5/4 


7 9 


397 


9 


50 


1,109 


Scotland 


Gen 




2 


25 


43 


9 


86 


17 


182 




Dom 







216 


2 (J 


75 





36 


347 


Dist Totals 


Gen 




7 


155 


273 


26 


23 7 


149 


904 


% of Total 







.8% 


17.1% 


30.3% 


3.1% 


31.7% 


16.5% 


100.0% 




Dom 







790 


99 


472 


9 


86 


1,456 


% of Total 







.0% 


54.33; 


6.8% 


32.4% 


0.6% 


5.9% 


100.0% 


District 17A. 




















Caswell 


Gen 










LG 


23 


15 


5 


59 




Dom 







4 


L3 


121 


4 


16 


158 


Rockingham 


Gen 




8 


21 


93 


12 


24 ! 


17 


394 




Dom 







469 


63 


231 


5 


56 


829 


Dist Totals 


Gen 




8 


21 


109 


35 


253 


22 


453 


% of Total 




1 


.8% 


4.6% 


24.1% 


7.7% 


57.0% 


4.9% 


100.0% 




Dom 







473 


81 


352 


9 


72 


937 


% of Total 







.0% 


47.9% 


3.2% 


35.7% 


0.9% 


7.3% 


100.0% 


District 17B 




















S tokes 


Gen 




1 


10 


i 7 


36 


5 


9 


148 




Dom 




) 


21 


3 


104 





8 


144 


Surry 


Gen 




2 


(3 


10 1 


44 


1 (8 


1 


324 




Dom 







293 


41 


253 


4 


1 


597 


Dist Totals 


Gen 




3 


48 


138 


130 


143 


10 


472 


% of Total 







.6% 


10.2% 


29.2% 


27.5% 


30.3% 


2.1% 


100.0% 




Dom 




3 


314 


49 


362 


4 


9 


741 


I of Total 







.4% 


42.4% 


6.6% 


48.9% 


0.5% 


1.2% 


100.0% 


District 13 




















Guilford 


Gen 




23 


368 


1,262 


477 


1,625 


156 


3,911 


% of Total 







.6% 


9.4% 


32.3% 


12.2% 


41.5% 


4.0% 


100.0% 




Dom 




24 


3,229 


143 


227 


21 


71 


3,715 


% of Total 







.bl 


86.9% 


3.8% 


6.1% 


0.6% 


1.9% 


100.0% 


District 19A 




















Cabarrus 


Gen 




5 


50 


1)1 


140 


3" 


5 


430 




Dom 







557 


4c 


353 


4 


5 


965 


Rowan 


Gen 




4 


111 


202 


33 


240 





590 




Dom 







715 


7 a 


135 


2 


1 


931 


Dist Totals 


Gen 




9 


161 


393 


173 


329 


5 


1,070 


% of Total 







.8% 


15.0% 


36.7% 


16.2% 


30.7% 


0.5% 


100.0% 




Dom 







1,272 


124 


538 


6 


6 


1,946 


% of Total 







.0% 


65.4% 


6.4% 


27.6% 


0.3% 


0.3% 


100.0% 


District 19B 





















239 
170 
326 

7 10 



Dist Totals Gen 8 

% of Total 1.4% 

Dom 1 

% of Total 0.1% 



71 

12.6% 

536 

50.9% 



139 

33.5% 

63 

7.2% 



35 

6.2% 

198 

22.5% 



246 

43.5% 

11 

1.3% 



16 
2.8% 

71 
3.1% 



565 
100.0% 

880 
100.0% 



*Cases covered in this table are general civil and appeals/transfers from magistrates to judges, all 
identified as (GEN), and Domestic Relations (DOM) cases. 



158 



MANNER OF DISPOSITION OF CIVIL (NON-MAGISTRATE) 
CASES IN THE DISTRICT COURTS* 

July 1, 1987 - June 30, 1988 















Judge's Final 














Order or 








Trial by 


Trial by 


Voluntary 


Judgment 








Jury 


Judge 


Dismissal 


without Trial 


District 


20 












Anson 




Gen 


1 


a 


30 


3 






Dora 


1 


133 


11 


139 


Moore 




Gen 


4 


94 


113 


lb 






Dom 


2 


35 2 


57 


35 


ilichmonc 




Gen 


3 


27 


61 


5 






Don 


2 


396 


23 


Id 


Stanly 




Gen 


2 


13 


44 


106 






Dom 





203 


14 


135 


Union 




Gen 


15 


65 


137 


20 






Dom 


2 


441 


55 


154 


Dist To 


tals 


Gen 


25 


212 


440 


155 


% of 


Total 




2.3% 


19.3% 


40.0% 


14.1% 






Dom 


7 


1,560 


160 


529 


% of 


Total 




0.3% 


57.4% 


6.9% 


22.9% 


District 


21 












Forsyth 




Gen 


11 


168 


383 


319 


% of 


Total 




0.4% 


6.4% 


33.6% 


12.12 






Dom 





1,301 


238 


566 


% of 


Total 




0.0% 


60.3% 


9.62 


13.9% 


District 


22 












Alexande 


r 


Gen 





7 


33 


3 






Dom 





1 16 


13 


6 7 


Davidson 




Gen 


5 


66 


214 


61 






Dom 


1 


506 


33 


357 


Davie 




Gen 


3 


S3 


51 


12 






Dom 





136 


33 


3. J 


Iredell 




Gen 


2 


L09 


184 


i<-> 






Dom 


6 


435 


137 


306 


Dist Totals 


Gen 


10 


217 


487 


106 


% of 


Total 




0.7% 


15.0% 


33.6% 


7. 32 






Dom 


7 


1,193 


266 


760 


% of 


Total 




0.3% 


50.5% 


11.3% 


32.1% 


District 


23 












Alleghany 


Gen 


1 


13 


18 


2 






Dom 


2 


56 


5 


17 


Ashe 




Gen 


4 


12 


30 


4 






Dom 





143 


12 


12 


Wilkes 




Gen 


2 


43 


177 


135 






Dom 





212 


53 


32 2 


Yadkin 




Gen 


3 


7 


4o 


27 






Dom 


1 


121 


17 


67 


Dist Totals 


Gen 


10 


75 


271 


133 


% of 


Total 




1.1% 


3.4% 


30.3% 


21.0% 






Dom 


3 


532 


37 


418 


% of 


Total 




0.3% 


49.0% 


3.0% 


33.5% 


District 


24 












Avery 




Gen 





5 


82 


23 






Dom 





70 


10 


37 


Madison 




Gen 





9 


11 


14 






Dom 





55 


13 


31 


Mitchell 




Gen 





10 


99 


39 






Dom 





41 


Lb 


60 


Watauga 




Gen 





57 


133 


29 






Dom 





160 


28 


72 


Yancey 




Gen 





10 


11 


9 






Dom 





70 


16 


15 


Dist To 


tals 


Gen 





91 


333 


116 


% of 


Total 




0.0% 


12.1% 


45.1% 


15.5% 






Dom 





402 


88 


215 


% of 


Total 




0.0% 


51.7% 


11.3% 


27.7% 



Clerk 



Other 



10 


2 


68 


3 


2 


19 


4 3 





12 





3 


1 





b 


130 


1 


3 


3 


260 


7 


23.7% 


0.6% 


27 


30 


1.2% 


1.3% 


1,030 


174 


40.9% 


6.6% 


21 


311 


0.7% 


10.4% 


4 'J 


11 


2 


21 


252 


19 


10 


20 


(2 


11 


2 


13 


209 


33 


9 


61 


542 


37 


37.4% 


6.0% 


23 


115 


1.0% 


4.9% 


10 


4 





4 


n 


6 


2 


9 


239 


7 


7 


18 


o4 


2 


1 


4 


332 


19 


37.1% 


2.1% 


10 


35 


0.9% 


3.2% 


68 


6 





10 


1 


3 





8 





3 





4 


100 


19 





45 


4 


1 


1 


4 


173 


32 


23.1% 


4.3% 


1 


71 


0.1% 


9.1% 



Total 
Disposed 

6 3 
301 
303 
547 
141 
449 
174 
358 
418 
658 

1,099 

100.0% 

2,313 

100.0% 



2,640 
100.0% 
2,987 
100.0% 



108 
219 
617 
977 
155 
214 

36y 

954 

1,449 
100.0% 
2,364 
100.0% 



43 
84 
75 
178 
623 
612 
149 
211 

895 
100.0% 
1,035 
100.0% 



136 
127 

38 
112 
151 
121 
340 
305 

35 
112 

7 50 
100.0% 

777 
100.0% 



*Cases covered In this table are general civil and appeals/transfers from magistrates to judges, all 
Identified as (GEN), and Domestic Relations (DOM) cases. 



159 



MANNER OF DISPOSITION OF CIVIL (NON-MAGISTRATE) 
CASES IN THE DISTRICT COURTS* 

July 1, 1987 - June 30, 1988 













Judge's Final 












Order or 






Trial by 


Trial by 


Voluntary 


Judgment 






Jury 


Judge 


Dismissal 


without Trial 


District 25 












Burke 


Gen 


4 


59 


109 


b2 




Oom 


2 


437 


53 


172 


Caldwell 


Gen 


3 


3 


133 


65 




Dom 





453 


34 


I J 2 


Catawba 


Gen 


14 


59 


243 


140 




Dom 


2 


7 13 


10 7 


456 


01st Totals 


Gen 


21 


136 


495 


267 


X of Total 




1.4* 


3.9? 


32.4* 


17.5% 




Dom 


) 


1,573 


204 


320 


% of Total 




O.U 


60.6% 


7.4% 


29.6% 


District 26 












Mecklenburg 


Gen 


25 


435 


2,435 


754 


% of Total 




0.3/. 


13.2% 


33.3;. 


10.1% 




Dom 


2 


3,525 


274 


660 


2 of Total 




0.0% 


73. 1% 


6.1% 


14.6% 


District 27* 












Ga3ton 


Gen 


1A 


103 


247 


42 


X of Total 




2.1% 


15.4% 


37.0% 


6.3% 




Dora 


2 


1,475 


136 


364 


X of Total 




0.1% 


55.2% 


6.0% 


16.1% 


District 27B 












Cleveland 


Gen 


7 


37 


92 


45 




Dom 


4 


533 


66 


}94 


Lincoln 


Gen 


7 


ii> 


47 


3b 




Don 





216 


43 


222 


Dlst Totals 


Gen 


14 


63 


139 


31 


Z of Total 




2.9% 


12.9% 


23.5% 


lb. 6% 




Don 


4 


304 


109 


616 


X of Total 




0.2% 


50.2% 


6.3% 


33.4% 


District 28 












Sunconbe 


Gen 


20 


136 


473 


173 


X of Total 




1.3% 


12.3% 


31.2% 


11.4% 




Dora 


1 


337 


220 


327 


X of Total 




0.0% 


33.3% 


10.2% 


38.3% 


District 29 












Henderson 


Gen 


3 


1, 


94 


5b 




Oon 


3 


437 


35 


101 


McDowell 


Gen 


4 


5 


33 


27 




Don 





20 


33 


252 


Polk 


Gen 





2 


22 


9 




Dom 





2 


3 


09 


Rutherford 


Gen 


b 


29 


44 


26 




Dom 





327 


13 


10 5 


Transylvania 


Gen 


1 


14 


35 


52 




Don 





121 


22 


60 


Dlst Totals 


Gen 


14 


66 


273 


170 


X of Total 




1.7% 


7.9% 


33.1% 


20.2% 




Dora 


3 


957 


111 


607 


Z of Total 




0.2* 


51.1% 


5.9Z 


32.4% 



Clerk 



Other 



30 


4 -J 





34 


133 


12 


1 


13 


304 


30 





3 


517 


91 


33.3% 


6.0% 


1 


60 


0.0% 


2.2% 


2,792 


420 


37.4% 


5.6% 


27 


23 


0.6% 


0.5% 


223 


39 


33.4% 


5.3% 


4 


230 


0.2% 


12.4% 


110 


30 





63 


49 


2 


5 


2 


159 


32 


32.6% 


6.6% 


5 


65 


0.3% 


4.1% 


502 


160 


33.2% 


10.6% 


25 


249 


1.2% 


11.5% 


73 


93 


4 


79 


54 


9 


2 


23 


5 


6 





11 


22 


1) 


3 


6 


32 


3 


I 


35 


136 


126 


22.1% 


15.0% 


15 


179 


0.3% 


9.6% 



Total 
Disposed 

363 

703 
359 
703 
305 
1,356 

1,527 

100.0% 

2,767 

100.0% 



7,461 
100.0% 
4,511 
100.0% 



668 
100.0% 
2,261 
100.0% 



321 

1,115 

167 

438 

438 
100.0% 
1,603 
100.0% 



1,514 
100.0% 
2,159 
100. 0Z 



335 
709 
132 
335 
44 
105 
137 
464 
192 
259 

340 
100. 0Z 
1,372 
100. 0Z 



•Cases covered In this table are general civil and appeals/transfers from magistrates to Judges, all 
Identified as (CU), and Domestic delations (DOrt) cases. 



160 



MANNER OF DISPOSITION OF CIVIL (NON-MAGISTRATE) 
CASES IN THE DISTRICT COURTS* 

July 1, 1987 - June 30, 1988 













Judge's Final 


















Order or 












Trial by 


Trial by 


Voluntary 


Judgment 






Total 






Jury 


Judge 


Dismissal 


without Trial 


Clerk 


Other 


Disposed 


District 30 


















Cherokee 


Gen 


I 


14 


18 


1 


L9 


7 


60 




Dom 





103 


13 


24 





18 


163 


Clay 


Gen 


1 


3 


12 








3 


19 




Dom 





21 


7 


29 


1 


2 


60 


Graham 


Gen 


3 


7 


L0 


2 


9 





31 




Dom 


7 


49 


23 


3 


2 


2 


91 


ilaywood 


Gen 


2 


41 


52 


9 


7U 


10 


134 




Dom 


3 


$49 


50 


85 





L6 


503 


Jackson 


Gen 


6 


13 


43 


19 


50 


12 


143 




Dom 


1 


2d 


L9 


153 





10 


211 


.1acon 


Gen 





16 


40 


14 


22 


9 


105 




Dom 





a 8 


24 


4 5 





15 


172 


Swain 


Gen 


7 


8 


11 


3 


8 


5 


47 




Dom 


2 


59 


10 


21 


1 


b 


99 


Dist Totals 


Gen 


20 


102 


136 


57 


173 


46 


589 


% of Total 




3.4% 


17. 3% 


31.5% 


9.7/. 


30.2% 


7.8% 


100.0% 




Dom 


13 


697 


151 


36 5 


4 


69 


1,299 


% of Total 




1.0% 


53.7% 


11.6% 


28.1% 


0.3% 


5.3% 


100.0% 


Stata Totals 


Gen 


419 


5,922 


15,956 


6,117 


13,147 


3,036 


49,597 


% of Total 




0.8% 


11.9% 


32.2% 


12.3% 


36.6* 


6.1% 


100.0% 




Dom 


165 


39,953 


5,042 


13,592 


423 


4,327 


63,507 


% of Total 




0.2% 


58.3% 


7.4/. 


27.1% 


0.6% 


6.3% 


100.0% 



*Cases covered in this table are general civil and appeals/ transfers from magistrates to judges, all 
Identified as (GEN), and Domestic Relations (D>1) cases. 



161 



AGES OF DOMESTIC RELATIONS CASES PENDING IN THE DISTRICT COURTS 

Ages of Cases Pending June 30, 1988 



Ages of Pending Cases (Months) 

















Total 


Mean 


Median 


District 1 


<6 


% 


6-12 


% 


>12 


% 


Pending 


Age (Days) 


Age (Days) 


Camden 


11 


61.1% 


2 


11.1% 


5 


2 7 . 3 % 


18 


248.4 


104.5 


Chowan 


36 


61. 0% 


11 


13. 6% 


12 


20.3% 


59 


237.5 


105.0 


Currituck 


3A 


63. 0% 


r. 


25.9% 


6 


11.1% 


54 


136.0 


106.5 


Dare 


61 


52. 2% 


19 


19.4% 


13 


13.4% 


4 3 


202.6 


120.5 


Gates 


17 


70.8% 


4 


16.7% 


3 


12.5% 


24 


138.7 


86.0 


Pasquotank 


1 )1 


66.9% 


14 


9.3% 


36 


23.3% 


1)1 


219.2 


100.0 


Perquimans 


31 


A3. 4% 


3 


12.5% 


25 


39.1/. 


64 


503.2 


207.0 



District Totals 



291 



62.2% 



7 2 



15.4% 



105 



22.4% 



463 



250.0 



111.0 



District 


2 




















Beaufort 




72 


37.1% 


43 


22.2% 


79 


40.7% 


194 


369.6 


274.0 


Hyde 




11 


55.0% 


5 


25.0% 


4 


20.0% 


20 


183.1 


172.0 


Martin 




2 


56.4% 


15 


13.6% 


33 


30.0% 


110 


339.5 


129.5 


Tyrrell 




4 


57.1% 


3 


42.9% 





0.0% 


7 


170.4 


168.0 


Washington 


4 5 


70.3% 


11 


17.2% 


3 


12.5% 


o4 


173.4 


30.0 



District Totals 



14! 



49.1% 



II 



19.5% 



124 



31.4% 



395 



316.5 



190.0 



District 3 




















Carteret 


155 


76.4% 


42 


20.7% 


6 


3.0% 


203 


111.2 


69.0 


Craven 


298 


73.2% 


30 


19.7% 


19 


7.1% 


407 


130.6 


80.0 


Pamlico 


15 


68.2% 


3 


13.6% 


4 


18.2% 


22 


162.3 


98.5 


Pitt 


205 


77.4% 


46 


17.4% 


14 


5.3% 


265 


121.4 


62.0 



District Totals 



673 



75.0% 



1/1 



19.1% 



53 



5.9% 



897 



124.3 



71.0 



District 4 




















Duplin 


9 2 


62.2% 


LI 


19.6% 


27 


13.2% 


143 


213.0 


92.5 


Jones 


24 


52.2% 


6 


13.0% 


16 


34.8% 


46 


404.1 


152.5 


Onslow 


502 


56.4% 


154 


17.3% 


234 


26.3% 


390 


246.7 


130.5 


Sampson 


107 


80.5% 


11 


8.3% 


15 


11.3% 


133 


140.1 


56.0 


District Totals 


725 


59.6% 


200 


lb. 4% 


292 


24.0% 


1,217 


237.5 


111.0 


District 5 




















New Hanover 


376 


53.3% 


163 


23.1% 


167 


23.7% 


706 


235.2 


146.0 


Pender 


49 


42.6% 


26 


22.6% 


40 


34.8% 


115 


361.5 


237.0 


District Totals 


4 2'> 


51.8% 


1,3 9 


23.0% 


207 


25.2% 


821 


252.9 


157.0 


District 6 




















Bertie 


45 


67.2% 


14 


20.9% 


8 


11.9% 


67 


159.2 


77.0 


Halifax 


178 


78.8% 


35 


15.5% 


13 


5.8% 


226 


120.0 


71.0 


Hertford 


73 


75.3% 


2 1 


21.6% 


3 


3.1% 


97 


110.6 


69.0 


Northampton 


44 


62.0% 


15 


21.1% 


12 


16.9% 


71 


173.4 


114.0 


District Totals 


140 


73.3% 


3 5 


18.4% 


3b 


7.3% 


4b 1 


131.9 


77.0 


District 7 




















Edgecombe 


12) 


65.1% 


22 


11.6% 


A A 


23.3% 


139 


263.5 


94.0 


Nash 


L78 


66.2% 


42 


15.6% 


k) 


13.2% 


269 


224.8 


106.0 


Wilson 


133 


81.1% 


20 


12.2% 


11 


6.7% 


164 


117.9 


51.0 


District Totals 


434 


69.3% 


84 


13.5% 


104 


16.7% 


622 


209.9 


84.5 


District 8 




















Greene 


11 


52.4% 


2 


9.5% 


8 


38.1% 


21 


307.4 


156.0 


Lenoir 


216 


69.0% 


59 


18.8% 


18 


12.1% 


J 13 


169.2 


91.0 


Wayne 


312 


53.6% 


120 


22.6% 


100 


18.8% 


532 


211.0 


134.0 



District Totals 



5 39 



62.2% 



181 



20.9% 



146 



16.9% 



366 



198.2 



114.0 



162 



AGES OF DOMESTIC RELATIONS CASES PENDING IN THE DISTRICT COURTS 

Ages of Cases Pending June 30, 1988 



Ages of Pending Cases (Months) 

















Total 
Pending 


Mean 
Age (Days) 






<6 


% 


6-12 


% 


>12 


% 


Age (Days 


District 9 




















Franklin 


71 


66. 9 % 


21 


20.4% 


11 


10.7% 


10 3 


196.7 


34.0 


Granville 


77 


65.8% 


22 


18.8% 


18 


15.4% 


117 


192.0 


100.0 


Person 


51 


79.7% 


10 


15.6% 


3 


4.7% 


64 


103.0 


49.0 


Vance 


110 


66.3% 


32 


19.3% 


24 


14.5% 


166 


133.5 


97.0 


Warren 


44 


53.7-4 


1/ 


22. 7 X 


14 


13.7% 


75 


193.3 


139.0 



District Totals 



353 



67.2% 



L02 



19.4% 



hi 



13.3% 



325 



130.3 



94.0 



District 10 
Wake 



9b 1 



29.1% 



447 



13.57. 1,900 



57.4% 



3,308 



623.3 



489.0 



District 11 
Harnett 
Johns ton 
Lee 



147 


61 


3% 


177 


55 


5% 


121 


66 


5% 



58 

73 
49 



24.4% 
24.5 7. 
26.9 7. 



33 


13.9% 


o4 


20.1% 


12 


6.6% 



233 

31 'J 
132 



174.1 
201.3 
145.4 



106.0 

149.0 

93.0 



District Totals 



445 



60.2 7. 



135 



25.0% 



10) 



14.7% 



739 



173.8 



118.0 



District 12 

Cumberland 

Hoke 



1,184 
47 



52.57. 
43.1% 



418 
16 



13.5% 
14.7 7. 



655 

4o 



29.0% 
42.2% 



2,257 
109 



254.2 
669.4 



161.0 
273.0 



District Totals 1,231 
District 13 



52.0% 



434 



13.3% 



701 



29.6% 



2.366 



273.3 



161.0 



Bladen 




53 


64.6% 


9 


11.0% 


20 


24.4% 


82 


235.9 


132.0 


Brunswick 




12 3 


33.1% 


55 


14.8% 


194 


52.2% 


372 


519.3 


400.5 


Columbus 




128 


32.9% 


50 


12.9% 


211 


54.2% 


iS9 


524.9 


451.0 


District Totals 


304 


36.17. 


114 


13.5% 


425 


50.4% 


343 


494.3 


377.0 


District 


14 




















Durham 




443 


39.7 7. 


242 


21.7% 


432 


33.7% 


1,117 


375.2 


259.0 


District 


15A 




















Alamance 




249 


70.9% 


56 


16.0% 


46 


13.1% 


351 


145.5 


70.0 


District 


15B 




















Chatham 




65 


63.7% 


19 


18.6% 


13 


17.6% 


10 2 


207.9 


115.0 


Orange 




168 


47.9% 


7o 


21.77. 


107 


30.5% 


351 


306.6 


212.0 



District Totals 



233 



51.4% 



95 



21.0% 



125 



27.6% 



453 



284.4 



168.0 



District 16 

Robeson 

Scotland 



203 
37 



64.9% 
63.0% 



71 

Si 



22. 11 

23.9% 



39 12.5% 

18 13.0% 



313 

133 



166.3 
203.6 



93.0 
112.5 



District Totals 



290 



64.3% 



104 



23.1% 



57 



12.6% 



431 



177.7 



99.0 



District 17A 




















Caswell 


13 


43.6% 


10 


27.0% 


9 


24.3% 


37 


256.7 


204.0 


Rockingham 


148 


65.2% 


61 


26.9% 


13 


7.9% 


227 


156.4 


36.0 



District Totals 



16o 



62.9% 



71 



26.9% 



27 



10.2% 



264 



170.4 



98.5 



District 178 

Stokes 42 63.6% 13 19.7% 

Surry 97 68.8% 17 12.1% 

District Totals 139 67.1% 30 14.5% 



11 

27 

33 



16.7% 
19.1% 

13.4% 



66 

141 

207 



180.7 
209.0 

200.0 



95.5 
86.0 

91.0 



163 



AGES OF DOMESTIC RELATIONS CASES PENDING IN THE DISTRICT COURTS 

Ages of Cases Pending June 30, 1988 



District 18 
Guilford 



Ages of Pending Cases (Months) 



<6 


% 


r..n 


% 


>12 


909 


3a. n 


»08 


13.0% 


1,114 



48.7 'i 



Total Mean Median 

Pending Age (Days) Age (Days) 



2,371 



521.9 



339.0 



District 19A 

Cabarrus 
Rowan 



199 
176 



69.1% 
80 . 7 % 



49 

18 



1 7.0i; 
8.3% 



4 J 
24 



11.9% 
11.0% 



283 
21 I 



156.5 
132.6 



36.0 
53.5 



District Totals 



375 



74.1% 



67 



13.2% 



64 



12. hi 



506 



145.2 



70.0 



District 19B 

Montgomery 

Randolph 



43 
198 



40. 6 1 
67.8% 



18 

4/ 



17.0% 
16.1% 



45 

47 



42.5% 
16.1% 



106 
292 



435.0 
190.8 



285.0 
105.0 



District Totals 



241 



60.6% 



65 



16.3% 



n 



2 3.1/. 



398 



256.0 



125.0 



District 20 



Anson 






62 


44.9% 


33 


23.9% 


43 


31.2% 


Moore 






117 


42.1% 


40 


14.4% 


121 


4 3.5% 


Richmond 






12 i 


52.6% 


j8 


24.3% 


53 


22.6% 


Stanly 






69 


27.9/. 


31 


12.6% 


147 


59.5% 


Union 






150 


50.3% 


59 


19.3% 


89 


29.9% 


District 


Totals 


521 


43.6% 


221 


13.5% 


453 


37.9% 


District 


21 

















Forsyth 



657 



54.2% 



226 



18.6% 



329 



27.1% 



1 38 

2 78 
234 
247 
298 

1,195 



1,212 



312.1 
380.6 
249.2 
739.1 
270.5 

393.6 



261.1 



197.5 
260.0 
160.0 
570.0 
177.0 

245.0 



147.0 



District 22 

Alexander 

Davidson 

Davie 

Iredell 



28 


63.6% 


10 


22.7/. 


6 


13.6% 


205 


39.4% 


112 


21.5% 


203 


39.0% 


52 


76.5% 


10 


14.7% 


6 


3.8% 


164 


61.9% 


58 


21.9% 


43 


16.2% 



44 

520 

68 

2b5 



163.3 
347.9 
133.3 

137.9 



108.5 

254.0 

66.0 

122.0 



District Totals 



449 



50.1% 



190 



21.2% 



2Sy 



23.8% 



89 7 



275.3 



178.0 



District 


23 




















Alleghany 




13 


85.7% 


3 


14.3% 





0.0% 


21 


35.1 


69.0 


Ashe 




44 


62.0% 


17 


23.9% 


10 


14.1/. 


71 


191.2 


111.0 


Wilkes 




8 5 


82.5% 


15 


14.6% 


3 


2.9% 


103 


102.0 


61.0 


Yadkin 




53 


63.1/. 


16 


19.0% 


15 


17.9% 


84 


252.5 


126.5 



District Totals 



200 



71.7% 



51 



18.3% 



28 



10.0% 



279 



168.8 



80.0 



District 


24 




















Avery 




32 


43.2% 


23 


31.1% 


19 


25.7% 


74 


328.2 


215.0 


Madison 




41 


67.2% 


10 


16.4% 


10 


16.4% 


61 


171.0 


87.0 


Mitchell 




32 


68.1% 


4 


3.5% 


11 


23.4% 


47 


273.5 


85.0 


Watauga 




55 


61.1% 


20 


22.2% 


15 


16.7% 


90 


232.1 


121.5 


Yancey 




47 


82.5% 


8 


14.0% 


I 


3.5% 


57 


111.0 


73.0 



District Totals 



207 



o2.9% 



o5 



19.3% 



57 



17.3% 



329 



223.0 



114.0 



District 25 
Burke 
Caldwell 
Catawba 



158 


60 . 3% 


77 


29.4% 


27 


10.3% 


183 


68.8% 


47 


17.7% 


36 


13.5% 


308 


59.7% 


90 


17.4% 


118 


22.9% 



262 
266 
516 



169.4 
174.0 
215.9 



106.5 
86.5 
93.5 



District Totals 649 62.2% 214 20.5% 131 17.3% 1,044 

District 26 

Mecklenburg 1,385 54.5% 376 14.8% 780 30.7% 2,541 



193.6 



280.1 



97.5 



139.0 



164 



AGES OF DOMESTIC RELATIONS CASES PENDING IN THE DISTRICT COURTS 

Ages of Cases Pending June 30, 1988 

Ages of Pending Casts (Months) 

















Total 


Mean 


Median 




<(> 


% 


ni: 


'( 


>1 2 


It 


Pending 


Age (Days) 


Age (Days) 


District 27A 




















Gaston 


473 


57.5;. 


130 


13.0% 


204 


24.5% 


332 


213.2 


127.0 


District 27B 




















Cleveland 


212 


89.3* 


22 


9.3% 


2 


J. 3% 


2 Jo 


35.6 


50.5 


Lincoln 


32 


95.3* 


i 


3.5% 


1 


t.2% 


;io 


73.3 


56.5 


District Totals 


294 


91.3* 


!=> 


7.3% 


i 


0.9* 


322 


32.3 


51.5 


District 28 




















Buncombe 


437 


59. 3% 


191 


23.5% 


IJj 


16.7* 


314 


19S.0 


121.5 


District 29 




















Henderson 


125 


66.5% 


33 


17.6% 


3!) 


16.0% 


133 


222.0 


77.0 


McDowell 


34 


66.1% 


27 


21.3% 


16 


12.6* 


127 


169.5 


108.0 


Polk 


14 


53.6% 


1 


4.5% 


7 


31.3* 


22 


334.5 


92.0 


Rutherford 


11') 


53.1* 


24 


10.7% 


6\ 


)6.2* 


224 


335.9 


141.0 


Transylvania 


b3 


62.4% 


14 


13.9% 


24 


23.8* 


101 


273.7 


126.0 


District Totals 


405 


61.2% 


99 


15.0% 


153 


23.9% 


662 


279.0 


112.0 


District 30 




















Cherokee 


37 


48.7% 


15 


19.7% 


24 


31.6% 


76 


386.5 


190.0 


Clay 


23 


85.2% 


2 


7.4* 


2 


7.4* 


27 


135. S 


55.0 


Graham 


14 


60.9% 


5 


21.7% 


4 


17.4* 


23 


204.7 


129.0 


Haywood 


127 


60.5% 


39 


13.6% 


44 


21.0% 


210 


243.2 


149.0 


Jackson 


51 


63.3% 


7 


3.8% 


22 


27.3% 


30 


303.3 


96.0 


Macon 


49 


50.04 


lo 


16.3% 


ii 


33.7% 


■iS 


345.9 


131.0 


Swain 


24 


57.1% 


11 


26.2* 


7 


16.7% 


42 


214.3 


153.5 


District Totals 


325 


58.5% 


95 


17.1% 


136 


24.5* 


556 


282.5 


146.5 


State Totals 


16,017 


52.8% 


5,282 


17.4* 


9,030 


29.3* 


30,329 


314.0 


155.0 



16S 



AGES OF DOMESTIC RELATIONS CASES DISPOSED IN THE DISTRICT COURTS 

Ages of Cases Disposed July 1, 1987 - June 30, 1988 

Ages of Disposed Cases (Months) 

















Total 
Disposed 


Mean 
Age (Days) 


Median 




<6 


% 


fi-12 


% 


>12 


% 


Age (Days) 


District 1 




















Camden 


11 


64. 7 * 





)5.3* 





0.0* 


17 


124.8 


75.0 


Chowan 


173 


86. 1* 


18 


9.0% 


10 


5.0* 


201 


103.3 


41.0 


Currituck 


81 


30.6* 


1/ 


16.5* 


3 


2.9* 


103 


113.9 


63.0 


Dare 


152 


75.6* 


2) 


11.4% 


26 


12.9% 


201 


173.0 


77.0 


Gates 


49 


37.5/. 


4 


7 . 1 :'. 


3 


5.4* 


So 


96.7 


75.0 


Pasquotank 


293 


36.6? 


2) 


8.4% 


17 


4.9* 


344 


100.6 


58.5 


Perquimans 


64 


74.4% 


9 


10.5% 


13 


15. IX 


36 


130.3 


86.0 



District Totals S30 82.3* 106 10.5* 72 7.1* 

District 2 

Beaufort 

Hyde 

Martin 

Tyrrell 

Washington 

District Totals 716 85.6* 49 5.9% 71 3.5* 



1,008 



836 



123.9 



125.2 



64.0 



311 


d7.9* 


21 


5.9% 


22 


6.2% 


3 34 


92.5 


41.0 


31 


77.5% 


4 


10.0* 


5 


12.5* 


40 


129.5 


42.5 


177 


79.0* 


12 


5.4% 


33 


15. b* 


224 


221.4 


41.0 


25 


100.0* 





0.0* 





0.0* 


25 


46.9 


29.0 


172 


89.1% 


12 


6.2% 


9 


4.7% 


193 


82.9 


17.0 



39.0 



District 3 

Carteret 

Craven 

Pamlico 

Pitt 



442 


77.7* 


32 


14.4* 


45 


7.9% 


569 


125.7 


64.0 


744 


73.4% 


143 


14.6% 


121 


11.9* 


1,013 


134.7 


59.0 


70 


76.1% 


15 


16.3% 


7 


7.6* 


92 


106.5 


56.0 


688 


80.6% 


91 


10.7* 


75 


3.8* 


354 


110.4 


54.0 



District Totals 



District 4 



1,944 



76.9% 



336 



13.3* 



243 



9.8* 



2,523 



Bertie 
Halifax 
Hertford 
Northampton 

District Totals 

District 7 
Edgecombe 
Nash 
Wilson 



207 


76.7% 


39 


14.4% 


783 


87.7% 


y4 


10.5* 


299 


79.7% 


55 


14.7% 


174 


84.1* 


23 


11.1* 



1,463 83.3% 



24 


3.9* 


16 


1.8% 


21 


5.6% 


10 


4.8% 



211 



12.1% 



71 



4.1% 



270 
393 
375 
207 

1,745 



123.4 



105.3 

72.6 

103.1 

100.6 

37.5 



59.0 



Duplin 


322 


80.1* 


41 


10.2* 


39 


9.7% 


402 


123.0 


54.5 


Jones 


60 


87.0* 


2 


i.n 


7 


10.1% 


69 


147.6 


38.0 


Onslow 


1,387 


74.8% 


177 


9.5% 


290 


13.6* 


1,854 


170.1 


69.5 


Sampson 


444 


32.3% 


51 


9.5* 


41 


7.6* 


536 


102.7 


43.5 


District Totals 


2,213 


77.4% 


271 


9.5* 


377 


13.2% 


2,361 


150.3 


62.0 


District 5 




















New Hanover 


1,259 


82.3* 


139 


9.1* 


123 


8.1* 


1,521 


114.9 


53.0 


Pender 


183 


77.2% 


30 


12.7* 


24 


10.1% 


237 


135.3 


54.0 


District Totals 


1,442 


82.0% 


169 


9.6% 


14 7 


3.4% 


1,733 


117.6 


53.0 


District 6 





















37.5 
46.0 
57.0 
52.0 

43.0 



509 


81.6* 


59 


11.1% 


46 


7.4% 


624 


115.9 


53.0 


897 


90.2* 


52 


6.2% 


36 


3.6% 


995 


75.3 


47.0 


624 


83.1% 


55 


7.3% 


72 


9.6% 


751 


156.1 


50.0 



District Totals 2,030 35.7% 136 



District 8 
Greene 
Lenoir 
Wayne 



District Totals 1,753 79.5* 228 



7.8% 



154 



6.5% 



7J 


79.3% 


9 


9.1* 


11 


11.1% 


522 


77.7% 


34 


12.5* 


00 


9.8% 


,152 


80.4% 


135 


9.4% 


145 


10.2* 



10.3% 



223 



10.1% 



2,370 



J9 

672 

1,433 

2,204 



111.6 



105.9 
121.8 
116.3 

117.5 



49.0 



28.0 
57.0 
55.0 

55.0 



166 



AGES OF DOMESTIC RELATIONS CASES DISPOSED IN THE DISTRICT COURTS 

Ages of Cases Disposed July 1, 1987 - June 30, 1988 

Ages of Disposed Cases (Months) 



















Total 
Disposed 


Mean 
Age (Days) 


Median 




<6 


% 


6-12 


% 


>12 


% 


Age (Days) 


District 9 






















Franklin 




279 


83.5% 


31 


9.3% 


.24 


7.2% 


334 


119.6 


43.5 


Granvi lie 




247 


32.1% 


i6 


12. 0? 


IS 


6.0% 


301 


101.7 


47.0 


Person 




252 


36. 6? 


24 


8.2% 


15 


5.2% 


291 


36.3 


42.0 


Vance 




460 


34.2% 


46 


8.4% 


40 


7.3% 


546 


91.0 


39.0 


Warren 




167 


32.7? 


2 5 


12.4% 


10 


5.0% 


202 


89.1 


45.5 


District 


Totals 


1,405 


83.9% 


162 


9.7% 


107 


6.4% 


1,674 


97.6 


43.0 


District 10 






















Wake 




2,373 


32.0% 


173 


5.1% 


451 


12.9% 


3,502 


153.5 


47.0 



District 11 
Harnett 
Johnston 
Lee 



555 
757 

473 



79.5% 
81.8/. 

84.0? 



96 

49 

74 



13.8? 

5.3% 

13.0% 



11) 
17 



6.7% 

12.9% 

3.0% 



693 
925 
569 



109.4 

118.5 

31.3 



46.5 
49.0 
43.0 



District Totals 



1,790 



31.7% 



219 



10.0% 



133 



3.3? 



2,192 



106.1 



43.0 



District 12 



Cumberland 


3,504 


71.5% 


516 


10.5? 


331 


13.0? 


4,901 


179.3 


71.0 


Hoke 


239 


36.0? 


2 3 


9.0? 


14 


5.0? 


273 


33.8 


5.0 


District Totals 


3,743 


72.3? 


341 


10.4? 


395 


17.3? 


5,179 


174.7 


69.0 


District 13 





















Bladen 

Brunswick 

Columbus 



247 


89.3? 


20 


357 


37.1% 


28 


479 


84.0% 


47 



7.3? 
6.3% 
3.2% 



8 


2.9% 


25 


6.1% 


44 


7.7? 



275 
410 
570 



69.1 
100.2 
109.5 



26.0 
43.0 
44.5 



District Totals 



1,083 



36.3% 



95 



7.5? 



77 



6.1% 



1,255 



97.o 



42.0 



District 


14 




















Durham 




1,339 


78.5% 


123 


7.5% 


239 


14.0? 


1,706 


157.3 


57.0 


District 


15A 




















Alamance 




1,009 


89.7? 


73 


6.5? 


43 


3.3% 


1,125 


34.1 


50.0 


District 


156 




















Chatham 




221 


32.5% 


13 


6.7% 


29 


10.8% 


263 


120.1 


43.0 


Orange 




433 


75.6? 


33 


5.3% 


107 


18.7% 


573 


185.6 


55.0 



District Totals 



654 



7 7.3% 



51 



6.1% 



13b 



16.2% 



841 



164.8 



51.0 



District 16 

Robeson 

Scotland 



983 
289 



39.1? 
33.3% 



34 
30 



7.6* 
8.6? 



37 

23 



3.3? 
8.1? 



1,109 
347 



67.1 

104.6 



34.0 
53.0 



District Totals 



1,277 



87.7? 



114 



7.3? 



65 



4.5? 



1,456 



76.1 



39.0 



District 17A 




















Caswell 


124 


78.5% 


20 


12.7% 


14 


3.9% 


158 


121.1 


60.5 


Rockingham 


704 


84.9% 


Hi 


10.0? 


42 


5.1% 


829 


89.3 


44.0 



District Totals 



328 



33.9% 



10 3 



10.4% 



56 



5.7% 



987 



94.4 



46.0 



District 17B 

Stokes 

Surry 



124 
509 



36.1? 
85.3% 



13 

33 



9.0% 
6.4? 



7 4.9% 

50 8.4% 



144 
59 7 



79.2 
109.9 



36.5 

49.0 



District Totals 



633 



85.4% 



51 



6.9% 



57 



7.7? 



741 



103.9 



47.0 



167 



AGES OF DOMESTIC RELATIONS CASES DISPOSED IN THE DISTRICT COURTS 

Ages of Cases Disposed July 1, 1987 - June 30, 1988 

Ages of Disposed Cases (Months) 



















Total 
Disposed 


Mean 
Age (Days) 


Median 




<6 


% 


6-12 


% 


>12 


% 


Age (Days) 


District 


13 




















Jullford 




3,373 


90.8% 


134 


5.0% 


153 


4.3* 


3,715 


82.6 


48.0 


District 


19A 




















Cabarrus 




339 


92.1/. 


50 


5.2;; 


26 


2.7% 


965 


73.3 


43..0 


Rowan 




374 


59.1% 


76 


7 .11 


31 


J. 2% 


961 


73.4 


43.0 



Olstrlct Totals 1,763 90.6? 125 



o.5/. 



5/ 



Z.9Z 



1.946 



75.9 



45.0 



Olstrlct 19B 

Montgomery 

Randolph 



Olstrlct Totals 720 31.3% 



149 


37. o% 


1'. 


6.1 


57 1 


80.4/. 


74 


10.4 



88 



10.0! 



7 

65 



72 



4.1% 
9.2% 

8.22 



170 
/10 

360 



39.2 
123.1 

116.5 



51.0 
56.5 

56.0 



District 20 

Anson 

Moore 

Richmond 

Stanly 

Union 



District Totals 1,952 84.4% 169 



273 


90.7% 


19 


6.32 


•i 


3.0'. 


412 


7 5.3% 


40 


7.3% 


95 


17.4% 


402 


89. 5*4 


36 


3.02 


11 


2.4% 


324 


90.5/. 


23 


6.4% 


11 


3.1? 


541 


32.2% 


31 


7.3 2 


6 


10.0% 



7.3% 



192 



3.3% 



30 1 

547 
449 

3 53 
653 

2,313 



65.7 

233.9 

72.8 

71.0 

129.1 

125.7 



38.0 
66.0 
43.0 
3b. 
46.0 

48.0 



District 21 




















Forsyth 


2,325 


77.3% 


131 


4.4% 


531 


17.3% 


2,987 


222.6 


62.0 


District 22 




















Alexander 


139 


86.3% 


19 


3.7% 


11 


5.0% 


219 


88.3 


42.0 


Davidson 


813 


83.2% 


35 


8.7% 


79 


8.1% 


977 


105.4 


49.0 


Davie 


170 


79.4% 


2) 


10.7% 


21 


9.8% 


214 


128.4 


56.0 


Iredell 


773 


81.6% 


99 


10.4% 


77 


3.1% 


954 


102.0 


43.0 



District Totals 



1,950 



82.5% 



22b 



9.6% 



133 



3.0% 



2,364 



104.6 



47.0 



District 


23 




















Alleghany 




76 


90.5% 


7 


8.3% 


1 


t.2% 


34 


70.2 


44.5 


Ashe 




162 


91.0% 


8 


4.5% 


6 


4.5% 


178 


76.2 


39.0 


WilK.es 




524 


85.6% 


63 


10.3% 


25 


4.1% 


612 


34.9 


43.0 


Yadkin 




173 


82.0% 


21 


10.0% 


17 


8.1* 


211 


102.8 


46.0 



District Totals 



935 



86.2% 



99 



9.1% 



51 



4.7% 



1,085 



35.8 



42.0 



District 


24 




















Avery 




93 


73.2% 


12 


9.4% 


22 


17.3% 


127 


193.4 


76.0 


Madison 




95 


84.3% 


12 


10.7% 


5 


4.5% 


112 


102.8 


55.0 


Mitchell 




98 


81.0% 


13 


10.7% 


10 


3.3% 


121 


124.6 


68.0 


Watauga 




224 


73.4% 


50 


16.4% 


31 


10.2% 


305 


153.7 


74.0 


Yancey 




84 


75.0% 


15 


13.4% 


13 


11.6% 


112 


143.7 


56.0 



District Totals 

District 25 
Burke 
Caldwell 
Catawba 

District Totals 

District 26 
Mecklenburg 



594 



76.4% 



102 



13.1% 



10.4% 



570 


80.5% 


30 


11.3% 


53 


3.2% 


603 


85.3% 


61 


8.7% 


39 


5.5% 


1,133 


83.6% 


90 


6.6% 


133 


9.8% 


2,306 


83.3% 


231 


3.3% 


230 


8.3% 


4,029 


89.3% 


241 


5.3% 


241 


5.3% 



777 

708 

703 

1,356 

2,767 
4,511 



146.9 



127.0 

95.0 

117.6 

114.3 



96.0 



67.0 



48.0 
43.0 
52.0 

49.0 



54.0 



168 



AGES OF DOMESTIC RELATIONS CASES DISPOSED IN THE DISTRICT COURTS 

Ayes of Cases Disposed July 1, 1987 - June 30, 1988 

Ages of Disposed Cases (Months) 

















Total 
Disposed 


Ml' illl 

Age (Days) 


M 
Age 


I'd inn 




<rt 


</o 


6-12 


% 


>12 


% 


(Days) 


District 27A 






















Gaston 


1,992 


33.1% 


89 


3.95 


180 


3.0% 


2,261 


99 . i 




43.0 


District 278 






















Cleveland 


1,007 


90.3% 


100 


9.0% 


3 


0.7% 


1,115 


71.2 




45.0 


Lincoln 


433 


38.7% 


52 


10.7% 


3 


0.6% 


483 


72.3 




44.0 


District Totals 


1,440 


89. 3% 


152 


9.5% 


1L 


0.7% 


1,603 


71.7 




45.0 


District 28 






















Buncombe 


1,586 


73.5? 


339 


i 5 . 7 /„ 


2J4 


10.8% 


2,159 


144.5 




67.0 


District 29 






















Henderson 


573 


80.8? 


60 


8.5% 


76 


10.7% 


709 


128.4 




51.0 


McDowell 


241 


71.9% 


51 


15.2% 


43 


12.3% 


335 


157.4 




66.0 


Polk 


90 


85.7% 


4 


3.8£ 


11 


10.5% 


105 


122.4 




43.0 


Rutherford 


430 


92.7% 


13 


2.8% 


21 


4.5% 


464 


32.5 




40.0 


Transylvania 


166 


64.1% 


Ih 


10.0% 


67 


25.9% 


259 


278.9 




61.0 



District Totals 



1,500 30.1% 



154 



8.2% 



213 



11.6% 



1,872 



142.7 



50.0 



District 30 




















Cherokee 


128 


73.5% 


25 


15.3% 


10 


6.1% 


163 


112.0 


55.0 


Clay 


46 


76.7% 


10 


16.7% 


4 


6.7% 


60 


168.5 


7 3.5 


Graham 


65 


71.4% 


17 


18.7% 


9 


9.9% 


91 


147.5 


73.0 


Haywood 


362 


72.0% 


o5 


12.9% 


7o 


15.1% 


503 


179.6 


73.0 


Jackson 


150 


71.1% 


}4 


16.1% 


27 


12.8% 


211 


150.8 


67.0 


Macon 


156 


79.1% 


lb 


9.3% 


20 


11.6% 


172 


135.1 


54.5 


Swain 


60 


60.5% 


13 


13. U 


26 


26.3% 


99 


267.4 


85.0 


District Totals 


947 


72.9% 


130 


13.9% 


172 


13.2% 


1,299 


164.5 


68.0 


State Totals 


56,437 


82.42 


5,732 


8.4% 


6,283 


9.2% 


63,507 


123.6 


51.0 



169 



AGES OF GENERAL CIVIL AND MAGISTRATE APPEAL/TRANSFER CASES 

PENDING IN THE DISTRICT COURTS 

Ages of Cases Pending June 30, 1988 

Ages of Pending Cases (Months) 



















Total 
Pending 


Mean 
Age (Days) 


Median 




<9 


% 


9-18 


% 


>18 


% 


Age (Days) 


District 1 






















Camden 




6 


42.9% 


4 


28.62 


4 


28.6% 


14 


436.6 


290.5 


Chowan 




30 


57.7% 


11 


21.2% 


11 


21.2% 


>L 


440.3 


219.5 


Currl tuck 




30 


49.2% 


21 


34.4% 


10 


16.4% 


61 


305.4 


293.0 


Dare 




109 


67.7% 


25 


15.5% 


27 


16.8% 


161 


248.8 


178.0 


Gates 




11 


34.6% 





0.0% 


2 


15.4% 


13 


266.6 


77.0 


Pasquotank 




5 2 


43.17. 


39 


36.1% 


17 


15.7% 


108 


327.3 


279.5 


Perquimans 




13 


43.3% 


6 


20.0% 


11 


36.7% 


30 


503.7 


407.0 


District 


Totals 


251 


57.2% 


106 


24.1% 


82 


18.7% 


439 


322.7 


199.0 


District 2 






















Beaufort 




72 


55.0% 


35 


26.7% 


24 


18.3% 


131 


340.9 


224.0 


Hyde 




5 


45.5% 


4 


36.4% 


2 


13.2% 


11 


411.0 


345.0 


Martin 




22 


59.5% 


2 


5.4% 


13 


35.1% 


37 


440.3 


241.0 


Tyrrell 




5 


62.5% 


2 


25.0% 


1 


12.5% 


8 


278.4 


133.5 


Washington 




21 


84.0% 


1 


4.0% 


3 


12.0% 


25 


230.8 


111.0 


District 


Totals 


125 


59.0% 


44 


20.8% 


43 


20.3% 


212 


346.6 


216.5 


District 3 






















Carteret 




129 


85.4% 


16 


10.6% 


6 


4.0% 


151 


152.5 


121.0 


Craven 




216 


84.7% 


35 


13.7% 


4 


1.6% 


255 


143.5 


92.0 


Pamlico 




9 


90.0% 


1 


10.0% 





0.0% 


10 


83.6 


47.0 


Pitt 




317 


90.8% 


28 


8.0% 


4 


1.1% 


349 


128.0 


94.0 


District 


Totals 


671 


87.7% 


80 


10.5% 


14 


1.8% 


765 


137.4 


99.0 


District 4 






















Duplin 




61 


60.4% 


24 


23.3% 


16 


15.8% 


101 


300.5 


191.0 


Jones 




24 


49 . 0% 


10 


20.4% 


15 


30.6% 


49 


559.0 


387.0 


Onslow 




318 


56.8% 


138 


24.6% 


104 


18.6% 


560 


356.5 


220.0 


Sampson 




106 


76.8% 


14 


10.1% 


18 


13.0% 


13.S 


223.4 


100.0 


District 


Totals 


509 


60.0% 


186 


21.9% 


153 


18.0% 


848 


339.9 


198.0 


District 5 






















New Hanover 


659 


61.0% 


269 


24.9% 


152 


14.1% 


1,080 


263.3 


199.0 


Pender 




83 


66.4% 


34 


27.2% 


8 


6.4% 


125 


274.1 


190.0 


District 


Totals 


742 


61.6% 


303 


25.1% 


L60 


13.3% 


1,205 


264.4 


199.0 


District 6 






















Bertie 




28 


7 5.7% 


7 


18.9% 


2 


5.4% 


37 


198.6 


135.0 


Halifax 




71 


32.6% 


12 


14.0% 


3 


3.5% 


86 


146.3 


79.0 


Hertford 




52 


89.7% 





10.3% 





0.0% 


53 


124.3 


79.0 


Northampton 


33 


82.5% 


4 


10.0% 


3 


7.5% 


40 


176.7 


112.0 


District 


Totals 


184 


83.3% 


29 


13.1% 


3 


3.6% 


22 1 


154.8 


84.0 


District 7 






















Edgecombe 




126 


78.8% 


20 


12.5% 


14 


3.8% 


160 


206.3 


92.0 


Nash 




214 


34.6% 


26 


10.3% 


13 


5.1% 


253 


160.7 


107.0 


Wilson 




160 


76.6% 


34 


16.3% 


15 


7.2% 


209 


210.7 


106.0 


District 


Totals 


500 


80.4% 


80 


12.9% 


\l 


6.8% 


622 


189.2 


102.0 


District 8 






















Greene 




31 


79.5% 


6 


15.4% 


2 


5. U 


39 


165.8 


118.0 


Lenoir 




171 


73.1% 


53 


22.6% 


10 


4.3% 


234 


207.9 


169.0 


Wayne 




317 


59.7% 


189 


35.6% 


25 


4.7% 


531 


232.6 


209.0 



District Totals 



519 



64.6% 



248 



30.8% 



37 



4.6% 



804 



222.2 



184.5 



170 



AGES OF GENERAL CIVIL AND MAGISTRATE APPEAL/TRANSFER CASES 

PENDING IN THE DISTRICT COURTS 

Ages of Cases Pending June 30, 1988 

Ages of Pending Cases (Months) 



District 9 

Franklin 

Granville 

Person 

Vance 

Warren 



<9 



48 


6 5 


3% 


69 


89 


6% 


53 


84 


1% 


108 


81 


2% 


36 


65 


5% 



9-18 



10 


13.7% 


6 


7.8% 


6 


9.52 


14 


10.52 


13 


23.6% 



>18 



15 


20. 5% 


2 


2.6? 


4 


6.3% 


11 


3.3% 


6 


10.9/. 



Total 


Mean 


Median 


Pending 


Age (Days) 


Age (Days) 


73 


366.9 


140.0 


77 


116.3 


73.0 


63 


208.9 


97.0 


133 


196.4 


125.0 


55 


22 7.6 


141.0 



District Totals 



Hi 



78.3% 



49 



12.2% 



38 



9.5% 



401 



218.3 



108.0 



District 10 



Wake 


2,441 


56.5% 


1,051 


24.3% 


829 


19.2% 


4,321 


321.8 


219.0 


District 11 




















Karne tt 


216 


76.9% 


60 


21.4% 


5 


1.8% 


281 


171.7 


147.0 


Johnston 


284 


66.5% 


129 


30.2% 


14 


3.3% 


427 


208.3 


169.0 


Lee 


240 


89.9% 


20 


7.5? 


7 


2.6% 


267 


134.8 


100.0 


District Totals 


740 


75.9% 


209 


21.4% 


26 


2.7% 


975 


177.6 


128.0 


District 12 





















Cumberland 
Hoke 



508 61.2% 
23 46.0% 



209 
7 



25.2% 
14.0% 



113 

20 



13.6% 
40.0% 



830 

50 



253.8 
739.3 



169.5 
382.0 



District Totals 



531 



60.3% 



216 



24.5% 



133 



15.1% 



880 



281.4 



170.0 



District 13 




















Bladen 


9 7 


60.6% 


21 


13.1% 


42 


26.3% 


160 


300.0 


174.0 


Brunswick 


212 


34.3% 


95 


15.4% 


311 


50.3% 


613 


671.7 


559.5 


Columbus 


167 


34.2% 


9 'J 


20.3% 


222 


45.5% 


438 


555.7 


481.0 


District Totals 


476 


37.6% 


215 


17.0% 


575 


45.4% 


1,266 


530.0 


455.0 


District 14 




















Durham 


697 


54.4% 


242 


18.9% 


343 


26.8% 


1,282 


344.7 


216.0 



District 15A 
Alamance 



321 



70.2% 



118 



25. 8% 



18 



3.9% 



457 



200.0 



122.0 



District 15B 



Chatham 


47 


73.4% 


17 


26.6% 





0.0% 


64 


160.8 


114.0 


Orange 


166 


37.0% 


150 


33.4% 


133 


29 . 6% 


449 


425.5 


353.0 


District Totals 


213 


41.5% 


16 7 


32.6% 


133 


25.9% 


513 


392.4 


317.0 


District 16 




















Robeson 


279 


70.1% 


36 


21.6% 


33 


8.3% 


398 


233.6 


169.0 


Scotland 


62 


60.8% 


24 


23.5% 


16 


15.7% 


102 


277.9 


172.0 


District Totals 


341 


68.2% 


110 


22.0% 


49 


9.8% 


500 


242.6 


169.0 


District 17A 




















Caswell 


33 


91.7% 


1 


2.8% 


2 


5.6% 


36 


156.1 


104.0 


Rockingham 


197 


78.5% 


53 


21.1% 


1 


0.4% 


251 


151.3 


141.0 


District Totals 


2 30 


80.1% 


54 


13.8% 


3 


1.0% 


287 


152.3 


134.0 


District 17B 




















Stokes 


48 


75.0% 


15 


23.4% 


1 


1.6% 


64 


193.8 


177.0 


Surry 


75 


76.5% 


13 


13.3% 


10 


10.2% 


98 


130.3 


70.5 



District Totals 



123 



75.9% 



28 



17.3% 



11 



6.8% 



162 



185.6 



130.5 



171 



AGES OF GENERAL CIVIL AND MAGISTRATE APPEAL/TRANSFER CASES 

PENDING IN THE DISTRICT COURTS 

Ages of Cases Pending June 30, 1988 



District 13 

Guilford 



District 19A 
Cabarrus 

Rowan 



Ages of Pending Cases (Months) 















Total 
Pending 


Mean 
Age (Days) 


Median 
Age (Days) 


<9 


% 


9-18 


% 


>18 


% 


1,981 


47.9% 


858 


20.8% 


1,293 


31.3% 


4,132 


. 411.3 


295.5 


215 
232 


63.0% 

84.1% 


113 
33 


33.1% 
12.0% 


13 

11 


3.8% 

4.0% 


34 1 
27o 


228.0 
156.3 


183.0 
98.5 



District Totals 447 72.4% 

District 19B 

Montgomery 66 39.3% 

Randolph 145 87.3% 

District Totals 211 63.6% 



146 



n 

15 
37 



23.7% 



13.3% 
9. OS 

11.1% 



24 



78 
6 

34 



3.9% 



47.0% 
3.6% 

25.3% 



617 



loo 
166 

332 



195.9 



621.3 
137.8 

379.6 



136.0 



512.0 
97.5 

163.5 



District 20 

Anson 

Moore 

Richmond 

Stanly 

Union 



56 
127 
141 

75 
134 



47.5% 
26.1% 
63.2% 
21.7% 

48.7% 



20 
83 
57 
53 
131 



16.9% 
17.5% 
25.6% 
15.4% 
34.7% 



42 
275 

25 

217 

bj 



35.6% 
56.5% 
11.2% 
62.9% 
16.7% 



118 


466.5 


437 


690.5 


IIS 


278.7 


345 


1,064.9 


378 


307.7 



310.0 
650.0 
211.0 
869.0 
274.5 



District Totals 583 37.6% 346 22.3% 

District 21 

Forsyth 1,067 58.1% 503 27.4% 



622 



267 



40.1% 



14.5% 



1,551 



1,837 



604.2 



281.1 



399.0 



196.0 



District 22 



Alexander 


32 


88.9% 


4 


11.1% 





0.0% 


36 


104.3 


57.0 


Davidson 


197 


59.7% 


114 


34.5% 


19 


5.8% 


330 


241.5 


190.5 


Davie 


74 


79.6% 


14 


15.1% 


5 


5.4% 


93 


186.3 


119.0 


Iredell 


24 b 


77.6% 


b5 


20.5% 


6 


1.9% 


317 


152.8 


105.0 


District Totals 


549 


70.7% 


197 


25.4% 


30 


3.9% 


776 


192.3 


132.0 


District 23 




















Alleghany 


19 


67.9% 


7 


25.0% 


2 


7.12 


28 


216.3 


135.0 


Ashe 


29 


69.0% 


11 


26.2% 


2 


4.8% 


42 


174.6 


77.0 


Wilkes 


134 


74.4% 


37 


20.6% 


9 


5.0% 


180 


176.2 


97.0 


Yadkin 


49 


58.3% 


15 


17.9% 


20 


23.8% 


84 


565.4 


196.0 



District Totals 



231 



69.2% 



7U 



21.0% 



33 



9.9% 



334 



277.2 



122.0 



District 24 



Avery 


. 73 


77.7% 


15 


16.0% 


b 


6.4% 


94 


196.8 


99.0 


Madison 


14 


66.7% 


6 


28.6% 


1 


4.8% 


21 


225.8 


206.0 


Mitchell 


23 


76.7% 


b 


, 20.0% 


1 


3.3% 


30 


182.9 


141.0 


Watauga 


100 


92.6% 


8 


7.4% 





0.0% 


108 


92.4 


55.5 


Yancey 


9 


45.0% 


a 


40.0% 


3 


15.0% 


20 


300.3 


304.5 


District Totals 


219 


30.2% 


43 


15.8% 


11 


4.0% 


273 


163.8 


84.0 


District 25 





















Burke 

Caldwell 

Catawba 



110 


79 


1% 


171 


73 


1% 


262 


84 


5% 



26 


18.7% 


50 


21.4% 


3o 


11.6% 



3 


2.2% 


13 


5.6% 


12 


3.9% 



139 
2 34 
310 



159.7 
189.2 
140.9 



107.0 
139.0 

35.0 



District Totals 



543 



79.5% 



112 



16.4% 



28 



4.1% 



b»3 



161.3 



107.0 



District 26 
Mecklenburg 



4,102 



73.4% 



1,054 



13.9% 



429 



7.7% 



5,585 



205.6 



148.0 



172 



AGES OF GENERAL CIVIL AND MAGISTRATE APPEAL/TRANSFER CASES 

PENDING IN THE DISTRICT COURTS 

Ages of Cases Pending June 30, 1988 

Ages of Pending Cases (Months) 

















Total 
Pending 


Mean 
Age (Days) 


Median 




<9 


% 


9-18 


% 


>18 


% 


Age (Days) 


District 27A 




















Gaston 


308 


82-6* 


51 


13.7% 


14 


3.8% 


37 J 


174.5 


133.0 


District 278 




















Cleveland 


102 


98. U 


I 


1.9% 





0.0% 


104 


94.7 


37.0 


Lincoln 


55 


sa.2% 


1 


1.3% 





0.0% 


56 


60.6 


52.0 


District Totals 


157 


98. n 


3 


1.9% 





0.0% 


160 


32.3 


66.0 


District 28 




















Buncombe 


555 


86. 4* 


63 


10.6% 


19 


3.0% 


642 


144.8 


99.0 


District 29 




















Henderson 


134 


64.12 


*2 


20.1% 


33 


15.8% 


209 


274.0 


155.0 


McDowell 


50 


74.6% 


12 


17.9% 


5 


7.5% 


67 


201.6 


115.0 


Polk 


12 


75.0% 


2 


12.5% 


2 


12.5% 


16 


263.3 


173.5 


Rutherford 


55 


61.3% 


19 


21.3% 


1) 


16.9% 


ay 


306.6 


160.0 


Transylvania 


37 


46.8% 


23 


29.1% 


19 


24.1% 


79 


354.2 


303.0 


District Totals 


288 


62.6% 


98 


21.3% 


74 


16.1% 


460 


283.2 


163.0 


District 30 




















Cherokee 


17 


31.0% 


2 


9.5% 


2 


9.5% 


21 


179.3 


83.0 


Clay 


14 


87.5% 


1 


6.3% 


1 


6.3% 


lb 


156.1 


70.5 


Graham 


7 


41.2% 


5 


29.47. 


5 


29.4% 


17 


397.9 


286.0 


Haywood 


62 


43.4% 


43 


33.6% 


23 


13.0% 


123 


332.5 


275.0 


Jackson 


54 


38.5% 


7 


11.5% 





0.0% 


ol 


135.6 


127.0 


Macon 


45 


50.6% 


29 


32.6% 


13 


16.9% 


84 


338.1 


266.0 


Swain 


8 


66.7% 


2 


16.7% 


2 


16.7% 


12 


261.8 


159.0 



District Totals 207 60.2% 89 25.9% 43 14.0% 344 

State Totals 21,376 62.4% 7,210 21.0% 5,673 16.6% 34,259 



282.3 
296.7 



182.0 
132.0 



173 



AGES OF GENERAL CIVIL AND MAGISTRATE APPEAL/TRANSFER CASES 

DISPOSED IN THE DISTRICT COURTS 

Ages of Cases Disposed July 1, 1987 - June 30, 1988 

Ages of Disposed Cases (Months) 

















Total 
Disposed 


Mean 
Age (Days) 


M ctl in n 




<y 


% 


9-18 


% 


>18 


% 


Age (Days) 


District 1 




















Camden 


6 


60.0% 


3 


30.0% 


1 


10.0% 


10 


234.3 


170.5 


Chowan 


37 


57.8% 


18 


28.1% 


9 


14.1% 


64 


296.9 


196.5 


Currituck 


42 


59.2* 


i 


11.3% 


21 


29.6% 


71 


301.8 


206.0 . 


Dare 


117 


66.1% 


23 


13.0% 


37 


20.9% 


177 


258.4 


126.0 


Gates 


15 


7». 9% 


3 


15.8% 


1 


5.3% 


19 


181.1 


141.0 


Pasquotank 


108 


78.3% 


14 


10.1% 


16 


1 1. 6% 


133 


196.1 


100.0 


Perquimans 


30 


66.7% 


3 


6.7% 


12 


26.7% 


45 


366.6 


147.0 


District Totals 


355 


67.7% 


72 


13.7% 


97 


18.5% 


524 


253.6 


136.5 


District 2 




















Beaufort 


109 


63.1% 


21 


13.1% 


30 


18. 8% 


160 


258.0 


123.5 


Hyde 


19 


70.4% 


3 


11.1% 


5 


18.5% 


27 


320.9 


148.0 


Martin 


52 


80.0% 


5 


7.7% 


3 


12.3% 


65 


276.7 


98.0 


Tyrrell 


4 


25.0% 


7 


43.8% 


5 


31.3% 


16 


495.7 


453.0 


Washington 


39 


83.0% 


4 


8.5% 


4 


8.5% 


47 


132.0 


128.0 


District Totals 


223 


70.8% 


40 


12.7% 


52 


16.5% 


315 


268.0 


128.0 


District 3 




















Carteret 


269 


81.0% 


5o 


16.9% 


7 


2.1% 


332 


164.1 


114.0 


Craven 


566 


86 . 3% 


74 


11.3% 


16 


2.4% 


656 


134.7 


32.0 


Pamlico 


27 


37.1% 


3 


9.7% 


1 


3.2% 


31 


129.0 


92.0 


Pitt 


702 


91.3% 


60 


7.8% 


7 


0.9% 


769 


121.9 


85.0 



District Totals 1,564 



37.5% 



193 



10.8% 



31 



1.7% 



1,788 



134.6 



90.0 



District 4 




















Duplin 


89 


65.0% 


31 


22.6% 


17 


12.4% 


137 


244.4 


99.0 


Jones 


37 


78.7% 


7 


14.9% 


3 


6.4% 


47 


171.7 


93.0 


Onslow 


639 


65.7% 


88 


9.0% 


246 


25.3% 


973 


330.4 


146.0 


Sampson 


268 


85.4% 


33 


10.5% 


13 


4.1% 


314 


139.4 


59.0 


District Totals 


1,033 


70.2% 


159 


10.8% 


279 


19.0% 


1,471 


276.6 


112.0 


District 5 




















New Hanover 


1,253 


76.4% 


211 


12.9% 


175 


10.7% 


1,639 


210.6 


104.0 


Pender 


156 


80.4% 


23 


11.9% 


15 


7.7% 


194 


205.9 


104.5 



District Totals 1,409 



76.9% 



234 



12.8% 



190 



10.4% 



1,833 



210.1 



104.0 



District 6 






















Bertie 




70 


83.3% 


11 


13.1% 


3 


3.6% 


84 


153.9 


90.0 


Halifax 




156 


83.4% 


27 


14.4% 


4 


2.1% 


18 7 


145.2 


97.0 


Hertford 




163 


90.1% 


14 


7.7% 


4 


2.2% 


181 


144.6 


114.0 


Northampton 




56 


93.3% 


4 


6.7% 





0.0% 


60 


112.6 


75.0 


District 


Totals 


445 


86.9% 


56 


10.9% 


11 


2.1% 


512 


142.6 


96.0 


District 7 






















Edgecombe 




167 


76.3% 


31 


14.2% 


21 


9.6% 


219 


234.1 


106.0 


Nash 




510 


78.8% 


104 


16.1% 


33 


5.1% 


64 7 


178.6 


104.0 


Wilson 




343 


34.5% 


46 


11.2% 


18 


4.4% 


412 


171.1 


84.0 


District 


Totals 


1,025 


80.2% 


131 


14.2% 


72 


5.6% 


1,278 


185.7 


94.0 


District 8 






















Greene 




62 


88.6% 


7 


10.0% 


1 


1.4% 


70 


107.2 


61.5 


Lenoir 




303 


72.0% 


102 


23.8% 


18 


4.2% 


423 


177.9 


87.5 


Wayne 




439 


61.9% 


230 


32.4% 


40 


5.6% 


709 


220.2 


120.0 



District Totals 



809 



67.0% 



339 



28.1% 



59 



4.9% 



1,207 



198.6 



103.0 



174 



AGES OF GENERAL CIVIL AND MAGISTRATE APPEAL/TRANSFER CASES 

DISPOSED IN THE DISTRICT COURTS 

Ages of Cases Disposed July 1, 1987 - June 30, 1988 

Ages of Disposed Cases (Months) 



Total Mean Median 



District 9 



<<) % 9-18 % >18 % Disposed Age (Days) Age (Days) 



Franklin 84 70.6% 27 22.7% 8 6.7% 119 214.0 147.0 

Granville 89 32.4% 16 14.3% 3 2.3% 108 154.3 87.5 

Person 90 68. 2% 31 23.5?. 11 8.3% 132 237.0 208.0 

Vance 133 73.0% 41 21.7% 10 5.3% 189 193.6 119.0 

Warren 44 75.9% 10 17.2% 4 6.9% 58 202.7 160.0 

District Totals 445 73.4% 125 20.6? 36 5.9% 606 200.9 143.0 

District 10 

Wake 4,420 76.2% 346 14.6% 537 9.32 5,303 133.1 100. 

District 11 



Harnett 


432 


36.9% 


58 


11.7% 


7 


1.4% 


497 


132.6 


84.0 


Johnston 


373 


71.52 


120 


23.0% 


29 


5.6% 


522 


190.2 


103.0 


Lee 


392 


34. 7% 


65 


14.0% 


b 


1.3% 


463 


133.7 


70.0 



District Totals 1,197 30.8% 243 16.4% 42 2.8% 1,432 153.3 84.0 



District 12 




















Cumberland 


937 


71.1% 


172 


12.4% 


229 


16.5% 


1,388 


235.0 


111.5 


Hoke 


96 


93.22 


5 


4.92 


2 


1.9% 


103 


123.8 


68.0 


District Totals 


1,083 


72.6% 


177 


11.9% 


231 


15.52 


1,491 


227.3 


104.0 


District 13 




















Bladen 


156 


69.3% 


24 


10.7% 


45 


20.0% 


225 


299.1 


81.0 


Brunswick 


341 


73.0% 


65 


13.9% 


ol 


13.1% 


467 


252.5 


101.0 


Columbus 


207 


62.9% 


49 


14.9% 


73 


22.22 


329 


313.4 


132.0 


District Totals 


704 


69.0% 


138 


13.5% 


179 


17.5% 


1,021 


282.4 


105.0 


District 14 




















Durham 


1,297 


71.3% 


213 


12.0% 


304 


16.7% 


1,319 


284.1 


116.0 


District 15A 




















Alamance 


454 


77.1% 


103 


17.52 


32 


5.4% 


589 


173.2 


35.0 


District 15B 




















Chatham 


70 


66.7% 


28 


26.7% 


7 


6.72 


L05 


214.1 


125.0 


Orange 


370 


30.8% 


59 


12.9% 


29 


6.3% 


458 


178.1 


101.5 


District Totals 


440 


78.2% 


87 


15.52 


36 


6.4% 


56 3 


184.8 


107.0 


District 16 




















Robeson 


433 


66.9% 


170 


23.5% 


69 


9.6% 


722 


224.5 


136.0 


Scotland 


150 


82.4% 


23 


12.6% 


9 


4.9% 


132 


142.1 


69.0 



District Totals 633 70.0% 193 21.3% 78 8.6% 904 208.0 110.0 
District 17A 



Caswell 


47 


79.7% 


4 


6.8% 


8 


13.6% 


59 


199.7 


94.0 


Rockingham 


347 


38.12 


44 


11.2% 


3 


0.8% 


394 


131.8 


77.0 


District Totals 


394 


37.0% 


43 


10.6% 


11 


2.4% 


453 


140.6 


78.0 


District 17B 





















Stokes 117 79.1% 25 16.9% 6 4.1% 143 153.0 69.5 

Surry 267 82.4% 43 13.3% 14 4.3% 324 152.9 93.0 

District Totals 384 81.4% 68 14.4% 20 4.2% 472 152.9 85.0 



175 



AGES OF GENERAL CIVIL AND MAGISTRATE APPEAL/TRANSFER CASES 

DISPOSED IN THE DISTRICT COURTS 

Ages of Cases Disposed July 1, 1987 — June 30, 1988 

Ages of Disposed Casts (Months) 

















Total 
Disposed 


Mian 
Age (Days) 






<y 


% 


9- 18 


% 


>18 


% 


Age (Days) 


District 18 




















Guilford 


3,129 


80. OX 


373 


9.7% 


404 


10.3% 


3,911 


200.9 


84.0 


District 19A 




















Cabarrus 


J02 


62.9% 


133 


27 .7% 


45 


9.4% 


480 


235.8 


190.5 


Rowan 


450 


76.3% 


126 


21.4% 


14 


2.4% 


590 


172.6 


121.0 



District Totals 
District 19B 



752 



70.3% 



259 



24.2% 



59 



5.5/. 



1,070 



200.9 



135.0 



Montgomery 


211 


88.3% 


23 


9.6% 


5 


2.1% 


239 


123.7 


75.0 


Randolph 




254 


77.9% 


59 


13. 1% 


1 i 


4.0% 


326 


156.4 


75.5 


District Totals 


465 


32.3% 


82 


14.5% 


13 


3.2% 


565 


142.5 


75.0 


District 


20 




















Anson 




41 


65.1% 


14 


22.2% 


8 


12.7% 


63 


237.2 


79.0 


Moore 




192 


63.4% 


32 


10.6% 


79 


26 . 1% 


303 


413.4 


164.0 


Richmond 




99 


70.2% 


25 


17.7% 


17 


12.1% 


141 


233.8 


103.0 


Stanly 




1 ,k 


88.5% 


12 


6.9% 


8 


4.6/. 


174 


138.4 


71.5 


Union 




214 


51.2% 


55 


13.2% 


149 


35.6% 


413 


392.9 


264.0 



District Totals 



700 



63.7% 



1 Id 



12.6% 



261 



23.7% 



1,099 



328.9 



134.0 



District 21 




















Forsyth 


1,748 


66.2% 


236 


3.9% 


656 


24.8% 


2,640 


329.3 


117.0 


District 22 




















Alexander 


SI 3 


90.7% 


9 


8.3% 


1 


0.9% 


103 


111.3 


67.0 


Davidson 


515 


33.5% 


64 


10.4% 


38 


6.2% 


617 


154.6 


75.0 


Davie 


122 


78.7% 


11 


14.2% 


11 


7.1% 


1 5 5 


174.4 


84.0 


Iredell 


403 


70.8% 


146 


25.7/. 


20 


3.5% 


569 


193.7 


118.0 


District Totals 


1,138 


78.5% 


241 


16.6% 


7U 


4.8% 


1,449 


163.9 


84.0 


District 23 




















Alleghany 


41 


35.4% 


4 


8.3% 


3 


6.3% 


48 


165.1 


108.5 


Ashe 


5 3 


70.7% 


14 


18.7% 


8 


I0.7/o 


75 


210.0 


126.0 


Wilkes 


510 


81.9% 


91 


14.6% 


11 


3.5% 


623 


171.7 


115.0 


Yadkin 


122 


81.9% 


19 


12.8% 


8 


5.4% 


149 


153.6 


69.0 



District Totals 



726 



81.1% 



128 



14.3% 



.'.1 



.6% 



395 



171.6 



106.0 



District 24 




















Avery 


132 


71.0% 


37 


19.9% 


17 


9.1% 


186 


256.3 


179.0 


Madison 


19 


50.0% 


8 


21.1% 


11 


28.9% 


33 


366.2 


264.5 


Mitchell 


74 


49.0% 


11 


7.3% 


66 


43.7% 


151 


313.2 


293.0 


Watauga 


238 


34.7% 


39 


11.5% 


13 


3.8% 


340 


154.7 


102.5 


Yancey 


31 


88.6% 


3 


8.6% 


1 


2.9% 


35 


146.7 


104.0 


District Totals 


544 


72.5% 


98 


13.1% 


108 


14.4% 


7 50 


223.2 


127.0 


District 25 




















Burke 


283 


78.0% 


73 


20.1% 


7 


1.9% 


363 


174.3 


145.0 


Caldwell 


306 


85.2% 


41 


11.4% 


12 


3.3% 


359 


150.7 


76.0 


Catawba 


610 


75.8% 


144 


17.9% 


51 


6.3% 


805 


192.7 


131.0 


District Totals 


1,199 


78.5% 


2 58 


16.9% 


70 


4.6% 


1,527 


178.4 


113.0 


District 26 




















Mecklenburg 


4,902 


65.7% 


1,942 


26.0% 


617 


8.3% 


7,461 


227.8 


152.0 



176 



AGES OF GENERAL CIVIL AND MAGISTRATE APPEAL/TRANSFER CASES 

DISPOSED IN THE DISTRICT COURTS 



Ages of Cases Disposed July 1, 1987 

Ages of Disposed discs (Months) 



June 30, 1988 

















Total 

Disposed 


Muun 

A(|e (Diiys) 


Med i;i n 




<y 


% 


9-18 


% 


>18 


% 


A(je (Diiys) 


District 27A 




















Gas ton 


52') 


77.8% 


127 


19.0% 


21 


».U 


668 


174.8 


113.0 


District 27B 




















Cleveland 


306 


95.32 


15 


4.7% 





0.0% 


321 


107.2 


87.0 


Lincoln 


154 


92.27. 


13 


7.3% 


k) 


0.0% 


167 


117.3 


95.0 


District Totals 


460 


94.3% 


28 


5.7% 





0.0% 


483 


no. 6 


39.0 


District 23 




















Buncombe 1 


,246 


32.3% 


240 


15.9% 


28 


1.3% 


1,514 


165.7 


134.0 


District 29 




















Henderson 


220 


65.7% 


29 


8.7% 


8b 


2 5.7% 


335 


302.3 


141.0 


McDowell 


107 


31.1% 


21 


15.9% 


4 


3.0% 


132 


150.5 


89.0 


Polk 


23 


63.6% 


6 


13.6% 


10 


22.7% 


44 


346.5 


211.5 


Rutherford 


9,3 


71.5% 


28 


20.4% 


11 


8.0% 


137 


209.1 


123.0 


Transylvania 


US 


61.5% 


22 


11.5% 


52 


27.1% 


192 


364.9 


151.0 


District Totals 


571 


68.0% 


106 


12.6% 


163 


19.4% 


840 


279.8 


133.5 


District 30 




















Cherokee 


50 


83.3% 


10 


16.7% 





0.0% 


60 


119.9 


50.0 


Clay 


14 


73.7% 


2 


10.5% 


3 


15.8% 


19 


203.7 


92.0 


Graham 


25 


30.6% 


2 


6.5% 


4 


12.9% 


31 


209.4 


141.0 


Haywood 


121 


65.8% 


52 


28.3% 


11 


6.0% 


184 


236.6 


180.0 


Jackson 


113 


79.0% 


21 


14.7% 


9 


6.3% 


143 


197.3 


114.0 


Macon 


88 


83.8% 


14 


13.3% 


3 


2.9% 


105 


153.1 


91.0 


Swain 


22 


46.8% 


12 


25.5% 


13 


27.7% 


47 


424.3 


320.0 


District Totals 


433 


7 3.5% 


11 3 


19.2% 


43 


7.3% 


539 


212.9 


128.0 


State Totals 36 


,347 


74.3% 


7,394 


15.9% 


4,356 


9.8% 


49,597 


212.7 


110.0 



177 



CIVIL MAGISTRATE FILINGS AND DISPOSITIONS IN THE 

DISTRICT COURTS 

July 1, 1987 - June 30, 1988 





Filings 


Dl 


.positions 


District 1 








Camdan 


92 




94 


Chowan 


778 




u28 


Currl tuck 


292 




295 


Dare 


50b 




515 


Gates 


247 




237 


Pasquotank 


1,1)35 




1,011 


Perquimans 


367 




314 



District 


2 




beauf ort 




1,527 


Hyde 




131 


Martin 




962 


Tyrrell 




L26 


Washington 


519 



District 


3 




Carteret 




1,631 


Craven 




2,692 


Pamlico 




324 


Pitt 




3,995 



District 


4 




Duplin 




2,996 


Jones 




201 


Onslow 




5,463 


Sampson 




1,406 



District 5 






New Hanover 


& 


148 


Pender 




749 


District Totals 


6 


897 


District 6 






Bertie 




940 


Halifax 


2 


,162 


Hertford 




789 


Northamp ton 




830 


District Totals 


4 


,721 


District 7 






Edgecombe 


7 


,024 


Nash 


6 


,085 


Wilson 


4 


,593 


District Totals 


17 


,702 


District 8 






Greene 




400 


Lenoir 


2 


,509 


Wayne 


4 


,242 



District Totals 7,151 7,186 





Filings 


Dispositions 


District 9 




franklin 


1,019 


1,235 


Granville 


1,451 


1,451 


Person 


885 


927 


Vance 


3,443 


" 3,568 


Warren 


1,051 


1,071 


District Totals 


7,849 


8,252 


District 10 






Wake 


17,861 


16,984 


District 11 






Harne tt 


1,723 


1,665 


Johns ton 


2,960 


2,786 


Lee 


1,402 


1,393 



District Totals 3,317 3,094 

1,549 

130 

1,004 

141 

•to 4 

District Totals 3,265 3,308 District Totals 6,085 5,844 

District 12 
1,636 Cumberland 12,623 12,529 

2,604 Hoke 726 672 

316 
3,946 District Totals 13,349 13,201 

District Totals 3,642 8,502 District 13 

31aden 1,871 1,821 

Brunswick 1,289 1,022 

2,875 Columbus 1,547 1,525 

131 
6,070 District Totals 4,707 4,368 

1,247 

District Totals 10,066 10,373 Durham 18,464 18,593 

5,825 

b47 Alamance 3,231 3,315 

6,472 

District 15B 

852 
973 Orange 1,807 1,725 

2,174 

852 District Totals 2,653 2,577 

336 

District 16 
4,840 Robeson 4,201 4,277 

Scotland 1,551 1,532 

7,122 District Totals 5,752 5,309 

6,083 

4,325 District 17A 

Caswell 748 776 

17,530 Rockingham 3,009 2,980 

District Totals 3,757 3,756 

373 
2,557 District 17B 

4,256 Stokes 792 748 

Surry 1,322 1,786 



District 


14 






Durham 




18 


464 


District 


15A 






Alamance 




3 


231 


District 


15B 






Chatham 






851 


Orange 




1 


,807 



District Totals 2,614 2,534 



178 



CIVIL MAGISTRATE FILINGS AND DISPOSITIONS IN THE 

DISTRICT COURTS 

July 1, 1987 - June 30, 1988 

Filings 



District 18 
Guilford 



District 19A 

Cabarrus 

Rowan 



District Totals 

District 19B 

Montgomery 

Randolph 

District Totals 

District 20 



Anson 






Moore 






Richmond 






3 tanly 






Union 






District To 


tals 


District 


21 





Forsy th 



District 22 

Alexander 

Davidson 

Davie 

Iredell 



District Totals 

District 23 

Alleghany 

Ashe 

Wilkes 

tfadkin 

District Totals 

District 24 
Avery 
Madison 
Mitchell 

Watauga 
Yancey 

District Totals 



19,668 



2,412 
2,983 

5,395 



907 
1,968 

2,875 



792 
1,429 
1,464 

964 
2,898 

7,547 



16,507 



649 
2,977 

630 
3,468 

7,724 



235 

300 

1,856 

443 

2,834 



286 

158 
241 
70S 
235 

1,628 



Dispositions 


District 25 


F i 1 i n u s 


Dispositions 






18,355 


burke 


1,937 


1,9 58 




Caldwell 


1,937 


1,971 




Catawba 


2,847 


2,733 


2,093 


District Totals 


6,721 


6,662 


2,975 


District 26 






5,068 


Mecklenburg 


36,617 


30,195 


325 


District 27A 






1,939 


Gaston 


5,207 


4,790 


2,764 


District 27B 








Cleveland 


3,446 


3,278 


774 


Lincoln 


1,217 


1,295 


1,409 








1,333 


District Totals 


4,663 


4,573 


971 








2,975 


District 28 








Buncombe 


5,170 


5,020 


7,462 


District 29 






16,067 


Henderson 


1,238 


1,188 




McDowell 


669 


650 




Polk 


183 


191 




Rutherford 


1,770 


2,152 


652 


Transylvania 


503 


542 


2,899 








573 


District Totals 


4,363 


4,723 


3,327 


District 30 






7,451 


Cherokee 


349 


338 




Clay 


7 6 


67 




Graham 


169 


173 


221 


Haywood 


820 


864 


257 


Jackson 


336 


287 


1,903 


Macon 


483 


462 


433 


Swain 


96 


51 



2,814 



316 

150 
222 
715 
223 

1,626 



District Totals 
State Totals 



2,329 
277,336 



2,247 
266,355 



179 



MATTERS ALLEGED IN JUVENILE PETITIONS 
IN THE DISTRICT COURTS 

July 1, 1987 - June 30, 1988 

OFFENSES CONDITIONS 





— 




Delinquent 






Un 


discipl 


ned 










Parental 
Rights 


Grand 


Ch 
be 

Col 


Idren 
fore 






Other 


Misde- 












rt for 




Ci 


pital 


Felony 


meanor 


Total T 


ruan 


cy 


Other 


Total 


Depen 


dent 


Neglected 


Abused 


Petitions 


Total 


Firs 


I Time 


District 1 




































Camden 







1 


2 


3 













7 




7 








17 




10 


Chowan 







2 


25 


27 


















4 








31 




15 


Currl tuck 










16 


lo 













1 




6 








23 




23 


Dare 







4 


11 


35 



























35 




52 


Gates 




1) 


2 


3 


LO 


















4 








14 




11 


Pasquotank 







13 


7 5 


38 







3 


3 


9 




10 


10 


4 


124 




58 


Perqutinans 







7 


8 


15 













1 




3 


2 


3 


24 




12 



District Totals 

District 2 

Beaufort 

Hyde 

Martin 

Tyrrell 

Washington 

District Totals 



>'■) 



105 



194 






'J 2 


93 


135 








1 


& 


7 








lo 


20 


Jo 








1 


2 


3 








b4 


38 


L02 


















2 


2 















17 4 



L59 



333 



13 



13 
2 

20 



35 



34 



) 
5 

24 


10 

48 



12 



3 




10 



2 oo 



210 

18 

85 

3 

118 

434 



161 



30 
3 

35 

176 



District 3 




























Carteret 





55 


99 


154 


1 


il 


12 


1 


10 


3 





1.3 


59 


Craven 





57 


133 


190 





13 


13 


7 


10 


5 


27 


252 


149 


Pamlico 





6 


23 


34 





1 


1 





2 


2 





39 


19 


Pitt 





117 


loO 


277 


3 


5 


8 


28 


17 


3 


3 


341 


145 



District Totals 



235 



420 



655 



h) 



34 



36 



39 



1 3 



35 



312 



372 



District 


4 




























Duplin 







12 


44 


53 


l 


i 


2 


1 


7 


2 


5 


7 3 


42 


Jones 










8 


8 


i 





1 


4 


1 


1 


1 


16 


11 


Onslow 







130 


20 1 


391 


i 


5 


6 


11 


3b 


24 


3 


471 


133 


Sampson 







30 


40 


70 


i 


1 


2 


1 


1 


5 


7 


8 


37 



District Totals 



172 



353 



525 



1 1 



17 



45 



i> 



16 



040 



273 



District 5 



New Hanover 
Pender 






180 
18 


301 
25 


431 
43 







3 3 
11 


33 
11 


8 



23 
2 


6 

1 


16 

1 


592 

38 


249 
32 


District Totals 





193 


320 


524 





04 


04 


8 


30 


7 


17 


650 


281 


District 6 

Bertie 

Halifax 

Hertford 

Northampton 








4 

7 

10 

9 



87 
66 
11 


4 
163 

32 
id 











13 







13 







6 

1 




2 

9 

11 



5 




1 






5 

189 
91 

is 


4 

77 
46 
31 


District Totals 





105 


104 


269 





19 


19 


7 


22 


3 


1 


32 3 


158 


District 7 
Edgecombe 
Nash 
Wilson 







72 
90 
79 


145 

211 
165 


267 

301 
244 


2 

3 


2 
7 
3 


4 
7 




1 

17 

9 


38 
31 
21 


15 

7 
16 


4 
5 

17 


329 
368 
313 


llo 
138 

120 


District Totals 





241 


571 


812 


5 


12 


17 


27 


90 


38 


2o 


1,010 


374 


District 8 





























Greene 3 14 8 

Lenoir 46 55 101 1 12 13 17 

Wayne 63 84 147 28 23 30 

District Totals 3 110 143 256 1 40 41 47 



2 

19 
33 

74 





3 

20 

2,3 




8 

4 

48 



10 
loo 
318 

494 



10 
90 

145 

245 



180 



MATTERS ALLEGED IN JUVENILE PETITIONS 
IN THE DISTRICT COURTS 

July 1, 1987 - June 30, 1988 

CONDITIONS 







OFFENSES 














Delinqu 


ent 








Un 


disciplined 






Other 


Misde- 
















Capital 


Felony 


meanor 


Total 


Truan 


cy 


Other 


Total 


Depen 





14 


34 


48 




i) 




18 


18 


5 





22 


56 


78 









3 


3 


2 





8 


14 


22 




5 




2 


7 


3 





14 


42 


56 




2 




13 


15 


2 





5 


1/ 


22 









7 


7 


1 



District 9 

Franklin 14 34 48 18 18 5 12 

Granville 22 5o 78 3 3 2 2 

Person 8 14 22 5 2 7 3 5 

Vance 14 42 56 2 13 15 2 2 

Warren 5 17 22 7 7 1 

District Totals 63 163 226 7 43 50 13 21 

District 10 

Wake 279 500 779 9 57 66 35 47 21 33 981 428 

District 11 

Harnett 26 1 15 141 2 3 5 6 8 3 8 171 65 









Children 




Parental 




before 




Rights 


Grand 


Court for 


bused 


Petitions 


Total 


First Time 


10 


1 


94 


60 


3 


3 


91 


^8 


6 





43 


40 


4 


2 


81 


62 


I 





31 


21 


24 


6 


340 


241 






26 


115 


141 


2 





66 


78 


144 


1 





42 


75 


117 


1 



3 


5 


6 


2 


3 


10 


4 


5 


12 



Johnston 65 78 144 1 2 3 10 17 2 11 187 92 

Lee 42 75 117 1 4 5 12 19 11 3 167 78 

District Totals 134 263 402 4 9 13 28 44 16 22 525 235 

District 12 



Cumberland 





300 


586 


386 


3 


351 


354 


132 


127 


55 


16 


1,570 


466 


Hoke 





12 


50 


62 


7 


2 


9 


13 


11 


2 


2 


99 


54 


District Totals 





312 


636 


948 


10 


353 


363 


145 


1 S3 


5; 


18 


1,669 


520 


District 13 





























Bladen 15 72 87 2 2 5 15 9 118 43 

Brunswick 103 115 223 6 14 20 3 8 3 7 264 92 

Columbus 6 27 33 1 3 4 8 6 1 52 33 

District Totals 129 214 343 7 19 26 16 29 13 7 434 168 

District 14 



Durham 





166 


179 


345 


12 


71 


33 


41 


40 


13 


23 


545 


231 


District 15A 




























Alamance 





57 


167 


224 


4 


34 


33 


21 


25 


10 


12 


3 30 


136 


District 15B 




























Chatham 





1 


12 


13 


1 


2 


3 


7 


5 


5 


9 


42 


35 


Orange 





61 


71 


132 


5 


12 


17 


13 


21 


6 


12 


201 


139 


District Totals 





62 


83 


145 


6 


14 


20 


20 


2b 


11 


21 


243 


224 


District 16 




























Robeson 





189 


265 


454 


12 


12 


24 


5 


65 


42 


21 


oil 


226 


Scotland 





77 


178 


255 


1 





1 


1 


31 


7 


3 


298 


115 


District Totals 





266 


443 


709 


13 


12 


25 


6 


96 


49 


24 


909 


341 


District 17A 




























Caswell 





25 


18 


43 











3 


5 


2 





53 


28 


Rockingham 





123 


166 


294 


3 


25 


33 


14 


20 


13 


2 


376 


113 


District Totals 





153 


184 


337 


3 


25 


33 


17 


25 


15 


2 


429 


141 


District 17B 




























Stokes 





54 


72 


126 


3 


11 


14 


12 


6 


1 


7 


166 


52 


Surry 





86 


113 


204 


27 


7 


34 


8 


23 


1 


6 


276 


108 


District Totals 





140 


190 


330 


30 


13 


48 


20 


29 


2 


13 


442 


160 



181 



MATTERS ALLEGED IN JUVENILE PETITIONS 
IN THE DISTRICT COURTS 

July 1, 1987 - June 30, 1988 

OFFENSES CONDITIONS 

Delinquent Undisciplined 



District 18 
Guilford 

District 19A 

Cabarrus 

Rowan 

District Totals 

District 196 



Other Misde- 
Capital Felony meanor Total Truancy Other Total Dependent Neglected Abused 







Children 


Parental 




before 


Rights 


Grand 


Court for 


Petitions 


Total 


First Time 



22 5 



,7b 



901 



47 



200 247 



57 



139 



50 



L76 



320 



496 



93 



141 



34 



111 



41 



78 



22 



1,478 



895 



529 






47 


128 


175 


5 


18 


23 


6 


23 


3 


11 


24o 


129 





129 


19 2 


321 


38 


3U 


118 


78 


38 


33 


11 


649 


160 



289 



Montgome 


cy 





14 


9 


23 


3 


5 


3 


3 


8 


3 





43 


34 


Randolph 







43 


138 


131 


18 


103 


125 


50 


64 


19 


13 


455 


218 


District Totals 





5 7 


147 


204 


21 


113 


134 


53 


7 2 


22 


15 


500 


252 


District 


20 




























Anson 










18 


18 


1 


1 


2 


1 











21 


20 


Moore 







21 


94 


115 





9 


9 


3 


49 


3 


13 


192 


73 


Richmond 







65 


56 


121 





7 


7 


16 


16 


9 


5 


174 


68 


S tanly 




1 


23 


86 


110 


17 


18 


35 


3 


12 


9 


7 


181 


96 


Union 







82 


L07 


139 


1 


7 


3 


48 


81 


U 


7 


365 


165 



District Totals 

District 21 
Forsyth 

District 22 



191 



213 



361 



384 



553 



602 



19 



15 



42 



45 



61 



bO 



76 



22 



158 



58 



53 



13 



32 



19 



933 



779 



422 



415 



Alexander 





8 


22 


30 


2 


11 


13 


5 


3 


3 


2 


56 


54 


Davidson 





43 


133 


136 


1 


60 


61 


23 


31 


7 


17 


325 


188 


Davie 





8 


26 


34 


4 


9 


13 


5 


6 


2 


5 


b5 


39 


Iredell 





144 


104 


243 


3 


32 


90 


13 


37 


3 


21 


417 


173 


District Totals 





208 


290 


498 


15 


162 


177 


4o 


77 


20 


45 


863 


454 


District 23 




























Alleghany 





4 


27 


31 


1 


4 


5 





1 


1 


1 


39 


16 


Ashe 





6 


43 


49 


2 


4 


6 


2 


6 


3 


1 


67 


24 


Wilkes 





35 


143 


183 


66 


52 


113 


71 


105 


54 


20 


551 


138 


Yadkin 





25 


124 


149 


9 


25 


34 


24 


17 


19 


2 


245 


49 



District Totals 

District 24 

Avery 

Madison 

Mitchell 

Watauga 

Yancey 

District Totals 



70 



342 



412 



73 



35 163 



51 


9 


60 


14 


6 


3 


9 


14 


1 


2 


3 





2 


31 


33 


12 





10 


10 


10 



3 


17 


10 


24 


9 


9 


14 


26 


5 


15 



60 



55 



115 



50 



41 



91 



97 



2 
10 
2 
2 
3 

19 



129 



7 
lb 

8 
1 
1 

33 



77 



1 

11 

1 




13 



24 



902 



88 
71 
23 
6y 
29 

280 



227 



38 
42 
23 
36 
19 

158 



District 25 
















Burke 





49 


67 


116 


7 


63 


75 


Caldwell 





109 


10 


119 


43 


108 


151 


Catawba 





79 


111 


190 


14 


34 


43 


District Totals 





237 


188 


425 


64 


210 


274 


District 26 

















Mecklenburg 



478 



893 1,371 



15 



308 



323 



28 
41 
24 

93 



27 



57 
32 
27 

lib 



105 



3b 
9 

21 

66 



32 



9 
14 

7 

30 



bO 



321 128 

366 112 

317 200 



1,004 



1,918 



440 



711 



182 



District 27A 
Gaston 

District 278 



MATTERS ALLEGED IN JUVENILE PETITIONS 
IN THE DISTRICT COURTS 

July 1, 1987 - June 30, 1988 

OFFENSES CONDITIONS 

Delinquent Undisciplined 



Oilier Misde- 
Capital Felony meanor Total Truancy Other Total Dependent Neglected Abused 



261 



3 58 



619 



201 



205 



38 







Children 


Parental 




before 


Rights 


Grand 


Court for 


Petitions 


Total 


First Time 



37 



950 



310 



Cleveland 





60 


lb J 


223 


5 


12 


17 


4 


37 


9 


3 


293 


129 


Lincoln 





35 


bi 


97 


11 


9 


20 


10 


16 


7 


I 


152 


70 



District Totals 



95 



225 



320 



H, 



21 37 



14 



53 



lo 



445 



199 



District 28 
Buncombe 



157 



19 3 



351 32 



224 256 



21 



17 



10 



655 



282 



District 29 



Henderson 







12 


42 


54 


47 


9 


56 


5 


5 


5 


13 


138 


86 


McDowell 







5 


29 


34 


19 


14 


33 


17 


16 


1 


5 


106 


69 


Polk 







5 


9 


14 


1 


1 


2 


3 


4 





1 


24 


16 


Rutherford 







49 


57 


10b 


16 


43 


59 


50 


74 


a 


7 


304 


70 


Transylvania 







8 


19 


27 


1 


5 


b 


15 


16 


4 


6 


74 


40 


District Tc 


tals 





79 


156 


235 


84 


72 


156 


90 


115 


18 


32 


646 


281 


District 30 






























Cherokee 







6 


16 


22 


4 


8 


12 


4 


4 





8 


50 


42 


Clay 







2 


3 


5 





2 


2 


1 


3 


2 


3 


16 


15 


Graham 







14 


41 


55 


2 


4 


6 














61 


bl 


Haywood 







10 


21 


31 


5 


36 


41 


13 


2b 


4 





120 


75 


Jackson 







6 


15 


21 


4 


3 


7 


6 


7 


5 


4 


50 


46 


Macon 







9 


14 


23 


2 


5 


7 


10 


8 


2 


4 


54 


48 


Swain 







3 


1 


4 





1 


1 


7 


5 


1 


3 


21 


21 


District Totals 





50 


111 


161 


17 


59 


76 


46 


53 


14 


22 


372 


308 


State Totals 




5 


5,587 10 


,025 15 


,617 


644 


2,709 3 


353 


1,340 


2,180 


841 


767 


24,104 


10,142 



183 



n \0 "3 in 
n h cm x 



CO <T\ ao c^ 



W 
H 
H 
< 

w 

>*£ 

u ° 
OH g 

fcU 3 

OH ' 

z ^ ss 

Kh.= 
o 

< 

U 

hh 

Q 

Q 
< 



o © © © © © © 



o o — • o o — • 



O ^N O O 



rg O O O 



O -< — I 



O O O O 



O OS 



© © © © © ^n © 



© © © © © cm © 



© © © © © CO CM 



cm © <r © © cm © 



•n <r CM © -T "0 



CM o © o o 



in -"sr — i o © <r — i 



© © © © © eg © 



© © © o © © o 



© m m © in o oo 



..o «-H cm nn © c* 



© © © © © 



© co -JD © © 



—■>£>©© 



© O -H © © -< 



© O t> © © 



© -h © <r 



^O ^J © no 



<T CM ns| h 



© "O © in 



© © <r vo 



o © — i © — < 



cm est in in 



>*o -h r-. 



© © © © 



© © -H © -I 



N N H O 



— < vO OJ — I 



-h rs. 



© © co © © 



©©—<©© -* 



10 O iT ^ o 



— » cm cm — • ffs in 



<r f*»> cm in 



t? rsi © no 



'■m <r © cm 



CM \D © vO 



en m oo en r-* 

vO >T CM nr> 

— < cm 



N CO -t N 
,T h ~« © 
CM cm CM 



<r <r -h — « © 



o — i -* o 



o — © — 



— © © -• 



CM CM — * — » 



vO © — < O 



O (N CO 0> 



— I © © © i-i 



-* © -* 



-^ rn 



CM 00 © © 



© 00 © m 



© CM -h © 



— . © -H 



•O 3 u 1) (U cr cr 

e O U U *-» « U 

<T3 -C 3 ra ra <n a> 

U u o o (j a. a 



4-1 —I 



rp ti u u in 

a r r h i 



—i i_> 



ro u ra -^ 

o y a. a- 



■^ « o (0 

•-i ry ^ a, 

Cl C irt F= 

3 o c m 



-o a. -j 



qj co o co 

•WW >u £ 

iJ H 4J iJ 

01 fO OJ o 

CO x x -z 



184 



O r* iA 
00 r» O 
CN CM rn 



NO-) 
<■*"> CH 00 

^H ^N m 



<r CN r^ 



o o o o o 



C — < -H 



-in ONO 



-» <r e-> -H 



O l^ o ^ 



fa} 

H 

< 



N (N vt O -< 



CN O O O -3" 



feU a 

CO & I 

OH ' 

5^ CO 



c< >-< 

O 

< 

Q 

•-5 

Q 
< 






Ol^vfl -H 



cm — * — < '.n 



— * — * -T O O 



m — i r- O O — ' 



— . —I ■& O CO — < 



r*. -h oo 



■4-^ CM OlA 



<r — * cm ^ n 



— a O u"* — < tA 



cm O ro '.O 



n »' ''' w 



—I — 4 ci 



0) -C 09 *^ *J 



CO -4 

u ^ -» 



u — > 



j*: > o u a; 
c c « o *-» 
flj tn u c u 



J- 1 *r-l 



cj « 



D O 

U =3 



185 



eg eg 


<r 


<t — i 


r*» m 


O 


-4- r~- 


rM 


m 


u~i rg 



— < rg 



w 

H 

< 



o -< »-h 



vo s rn 



w 

U ° 
OH S 

fey s 



OH ' 

■<J M t-f 

O 
H 
< 

U 

M 

o 

Q 



-h — 1 CM 



r>. O **-> 



— O -* 



r* rg 


AS 


gf in 


Ol 


O « 


<r 


ci pg 


in 


rn — 


in 


IN 


(V 







-f 




ao 


-T 




in 




m 


iJ 




U 


4) 


jj 


O 




O 


O 


U 




■ 




C 




Li 


m 


Lf 


ffl 


U 


J-> 


jr 


U 


H 


u 


W 


Lj 


V> 


fl 


in 


•^ 


D 




-H 




a 


O 


O 


-< 


n 



— — I -H J3 kl 



a e ki 
on u 

QJ *-' .-1 



J* U — 



e a, 
o H 
ro o 
ij -o 
c c 
o m 



186 



'O <T O <T 


00 


<^ N (N m 


CO 


O o it* cm *-» 


<r 


n h m 


O <"-»■.£> ~H 


vO 


-a - 00 O "1 


00 


.— i r^ CO f—t CO 


■o 


OO '•O CM 


cm <r 


r> 


\r\ cm 


oo 


CM CM — 1 


£> 


O '■© co 



o o o o o 



-I O — ' <T 



— i O U"l O 



— i O O O O — i 



o on r-~ r-H -a - 



o o% o o> CO 

— ( ■ — I ro 



— i O — I o o 



CO 

w 

H 
H 



^ CM 



CO •— t — ( <— » O 



O eo -n --H no 



H OMN O H 



r-* CM ^h o O 



W 

> * 00 

Sot 

u ° 
PS ^ 

OH g 



CO 

O 

z 

I— I 

w 
X 

o 

< 
U 

Q 

P 
i-j 
Q 

< 



CO £ 

K if 



o as -a- — i 



— i — ■ co o — i — i 



O (N n -- N r^ 



H»-C"l 



n a\m ia 



O — i r-J O"- 



in ca w < 



en o >£> <f 



n \o m -t 



m co — * en 



O O — • r-» 



^ un -* — < O 



in o c 1 tj 



N ^o N (C n 



K h •« 3 .0 



.««•"•; -if 



cT c5 (5V -> K. 

-J CT> — I cj -J 






icon 



e 


id 


1 '- 


e 


w 


3 


y 


-5 e 







m 


e 


a 2 


••* 


ffl 


e 


© 


s 




<t 


v 


m m 


a 







»-v 




«* 




■j 


fl 


y 


u 




**, 


id 


m 


u 


u 


v> 


a 




h. 


a 



41 Q 

*) 9 H 

Sm fl 

Ifl fi 41 41 

K .ri .» T) 

IV l» S» « 

•«. M «l Ij 

«f S O ^ 



If 

Ij 






2 




















15 




3 






a 




e 




M 




la 






M 




t* 






i*i 






*T 








irt 






k9 


oa 


u 


im 




u 


(N 






<j 


N 




u 


IM 


t< 


U 




*< 


U 








y 






u 




J 


• ad 


•j 


a 


Md 


•d 






««d 


y 


E>d 


i=( 


k=) 


Id 


u 


<* 


L 


U 


e h « 

4j BO 
>, W dfi s 
h Md o (9 




Id 


y 


cd f(l 


id 


y 


a 


fal 




dS we 


U 


»d 


Bx 


fcl 


Mri 


41 dS 







41 


W 


H 


M II M 


w 


kl 


4i 


m 


Id 


w i 3 


ifl 


ki 


pd 


«pd 


w 


— fl fH "0 


«* 


b) 


u 




u 


,* fi « 


.rt 


u 


,* 


<a 


to 


a 


Ift 


(flu J 


a 


59 


w 


id =< j 


>=5 


m 


y 




■H 


"< K«. I 




•rt 


E» fl •-< ID 


it 






a i? m 






«j 




fS 


•* < vt "n 




B 


•a r »• a 


s. 




n 


* u y 




a 


w 



187 



CM O O O — * 



— i rsj o O — < O O 



r». o O O cm co O 



C/2 

OS 
H 



— o o o <r 



— o O ~c -i 



o — « o <-^ o o o 



O — * O cm ir> — * -h 



I 



z£ 
u ° 

c/3 OS 

z^£ 

<J M *-T 

O 
H 
< 
U 

"-5 

Q 



— ' o — i 



in so — i 



— • o o — i cr\ —• 



^o eft <r o oo r-* 



— * o O r- — i 



-H C* — i <NJ CO — < 



O <t cm O co 



0"» ~"* fO C^ ^5 



o o o co o — • o 



-T r**> O O -*0 c^-, co — * 



O O O en O — * O 



-^ — < o r-* -r — ' r*». 



o o o oo cm ^ — i 



cm CM cm \D <"•"» rM O 



— • CM r^. *Q r-^ — i O 



CM 




CO 


i_» 




JJ 


u 




u 




c: 




Lj 





Li 




u 


u 


en 


lD 


M 




RJ 




-i 


u 


a 



> O -J 





a- 




N 


OJ 


u 


J3 


O 


P 







i^ 


U 


i-> 


c 


ca 


=3 




CO 


Cf 






<D <J O 3 Ij 



y 


E 


o 












a 


o 


eg 


r 




U 


>■, JC 


1 


Y 


O 


— i 


0J 


«j n 


>> 


o 


u 


m 


-C 


~-» u 


ig 


« 


10 


1 


U 


u '.: 


3 


•-> 


!C 


ro 



188 



M 

I 

L 
L 

I 
O 

N 
S 



o 

F 



C 

A 
S 
E 
S 



FILING AND DISPOSITION TRENDS OF INFRACTIONS AND 
CRIMINAL CASES IN THE DISTRICT COURTS 

1978-79 - 1987-88 



1.6 



1.4 



1.2 



0.8 



0.6 



0.4 



0.2 



y All Cases 



Filings 




Dispositions 



Filings 



:/ 



\s 



Motor Vehicle 



Dispositions 




Filings 



Dispositions 



Non-Motor Vehicle 



78-79 79-80 80-81 81-82 82-83 83-84 84-85 85-86 86-87 87- 



Infractions are non-criminal violations of law not punish- 
able by improsonment. The category was first created 
September 1, 1986. To allow meaningful comparison of 
multi-year trends in the district courts, infracteions are 
included with criminal motor vehicle cases in this chart. 
Almost all infractions would have been criminal motor 



vehicle cases in prior years. Motor vehicle plus infraction 
filings together in 1987-88 were 5.4% greater than the 
corresponding motor vehicle and infraction filings the 
year before. Non-motor vehicle filings increased 9.9% in 
1987-88. Non-motor vehicle dispositions increased 9.6%. 



189 



MOTOR VEHICLE CRIMINAL CASE FILINGS AND 
DISPOSITIONS IN THE DISTRICT COURTS 



July 1, 1987 - June 30, 1988 



Total 
Filed 



District 1 



Camden 




223 


Chowan 




321 


Currl tuck 




713 


Dare 




2,715 


Gates 




532 


Pasquotank 




953 


Perquimans 




354 


District 


Totals 


5,326 


District 2 






Beaufort 




3,134 


Hyde 




484 


Martin 




1,385 


Tyrrell 




503 


Washington 




54 9 


District 


Totals 


6,055 


District 3 






Carteret 




3,731 


Craven 




4,844 


Pamlico 




475 


Pitt 




7,645 


District 


Totals 


16,695 


District 4 






Duplin 




1,715 


Jones 




657 


Onslow 




6,657 


Sampson 




3,340 


District 


Totals 


12,369 


District 5 






New Hanover 


3,643 


Pender 




1,742 


District 


Totals 


10,385 


District 6 






Bertie 




794 


Halifax 




3,368 


Hertford 




1,387 


Northampton 


1,308 


District 


Totals 


6,857 


District 7 






Edgecombe 




4,043 


Nash 




5,997 


Wilson 




4,005 


District 


Totals 


14,045 


District 8 







Greene 850 

Lenoir 4,514 

Wayne 4,878 

District Totals 10,242 



Waiver 

73 
149 
223 

73; 

93 

231 
119 

1,625 



754 
99 

490 
133 
22'3 

1,709 



869 

372 

120 

1,438 

3,349 



647 

Ji 

1,089 

906 

2,720 



2,016 
338 

2,354 



246 

1,287 

373 

279 

2,185 



1,230 
2,029 
1,324 

4,583 



150 

944 

1,091 

2,185 



Dispositions 




Other 


Total Disp 


164 


237 


173 


327 


760 


933 


1,768 


2,505 


413 


511 


692 


923 


206 


325 



4,186 



2,409 

333 

1,911 

344 

29 1 

5,343 



2,523 

4,008 

268 

5,916 

12,720 



2,189 

475 

5,638 

2,484 

10,786 



6,453 
1,485 

7,938 



713 

2,501 
1,101 
1,339 

5,654 



2,150 
3,549 
2,102 

7,301 



649 
3,373 
2,591 

6,613 



5,811 



3,163 
487 

2,401 
482 

5 19 

7,052 



3,397 

4,880 

388 

7,404 

16,069 



2,836 

553 

6,7 27 

3,390 

13,506 



8,469 
1,823 

10,292 



959 
3,738 
1,474 
1,613 

7,839 



3,380 
5,578 
3,426 

12,384 



799 
4,317 
3,682 

8,798 



190 



MOTOR VEHICLE CRIMINAL CASE FILINGS AND 
DISPOSITIONS IN THE DISTRICT COURTS 

July 1, 1987 - June 30, 1988 

Dispositions 



Total 
Filed 



District 9 



franklin 


1,927 


Granville 


1,429 


Person 


1,559 


Vance 


2,213 


Warren 


966 


District Totals 


8,099 


District 10 




Wake 


38,712 


District 11 




Harnett 


4,309 


Johnston 


5,341 


Lee 


2,587 


District Totals 


12,737 


District 12 




Cumberland 


17,330 


rioke 


2,375 


District Totals 


19,755 


District 13 




Bladen 


2,545 


Brunswick 


2,634 


Columbus 


3,386 


District Totals 


8,615 


District 14 




Durham 


13,570 


District 15A 




Alamance 


6,364 


District 15B 




Chatham 


3,127 


Orange 


4,461 


District Totals 


7,588 


District 16 




Robeson 


6,010 


Scotland 


1,321 


District Totals 


7,831 


District 17A 




Caswell 


1,123 


Rockingham 


4,083 


District Totals 


5,206 


District 17B 





Stokes 
Surry 

District Totals 



1,349 
3,153 

4,502 



Waiver 

308 

394 
319 
369 

193 

1,583 
6,747 



946 

1,2 69 

711 

2,926 



3,444 
621 

4,065 



509 

2,639 

537 

3,685 
3,098 

1,291 



569 
811 

1,330 



1,098 
456 

1,554 



236 
367 

1,103 



34 9 
790 

1,139 



Other 

1,364 

952 

1,142 

1,715 

605 

5,778 
31,063 



2,557 
4,376 
1,683 

3,621 



13,933 
1,762 

15,695 



1,973 
3,589 
2,701 

8,268 



9,204 



4,941 



2,361 
3,259 

5,620 



4,748 
1,426 

6,174 



9 39 
3,107 

4,046 



951 
2,042 

2,993 



Total Dispositions 

1,672 
1,346 
1,461 
2,084 
803 

7,366 
37,810 



3,503 
5,645 
2,399 

11,547 



17,377 
2,383 

19,760 



2,437 
6,228 
3,238 

11,953 
12,302 

6,232 



2,930 
4,070 

7,000 



5,846 
1,382 

7,728 



1,175 
3,974 

5,149 



1,300 
2,832 

4,132 



191 



MOTOR VEHICLE CRIMINAL CASE FILINGS AND 
DISPOSITIONS IN THE DISTRICT COURTS 



July 1, 1987 - June 30, 1988 



Total 
Filed 



District 13 



Guilford 




26,226 


District 19A 

Cabarrus 

Rowan 




5,759 
4,301 


District To 


tals 


10,560 


District 19B 

Montgomery 

Randolph 




2,011 
5,493 


District To 


tals 


7,504 


District 20 

Anson 

Moore 

Richmond 

Stanly 

Union 




2,105 
3,796 
2,955 
2,032 
4,221 


District Totals 


15,159 


District 21 
Forsyth 




15,870 


District 22 

Alexander 

Davidson 

Davie 

Iredell 




1,050 
6,996 
1,263 
6,277 


District Tc 


tals 


15,586 


District 23 







Alleghany 
Ashe 
Wilkes 
Yadkin 

District Totals 

Di strict 24 

Avery 

Madison 

Mitchell 

Watauga 

Yancey 

District Totals 

District 25 
Burke 
Caldwell 
Catawba 

District Totals 

District 26 
Mecklenburg 



453 

782 

2,611 

1,331 

5,177 



911 
985 
645 
2,639 
537 

5,767 



4,211 
4,310 
7,198 

15,719 



39,332 



Wnlver 



3,743 



1,430 
1,164 

2,594 



286 
1,051 

1,337 



33) 
774 
935 
598 
1,081 

3,771 
2,648 



218 
1,947 

346 
1,368 

4,379 



78 

224 
691 

ijn 

1,293 



175 
532 
230 
1,196 
277 

2,410 



1,023 

898 

1,997 

3,913 
12,345 



Dispos 


iti 


ons 




Other 






Total Dispositions 


13,935 






22,678 


4,299 






5,729 


3,440 






4,604 



7,739 



1,719 

3,900 

5,619 



1,7 23 
2,482 
1,766 
1,505 
2,726 

10,207 



11,859 



824 
4,714 
1,267 
4,244 

ll,04y 



528 

521 

1,938 

1,009 

3,996 



740 
447 
434 
1,338 
330 

3,289 



2,878 
2,990 
5,032 

10,900 
23,938 



10,333 



2,005 
4,951 

6,956 



2,061 
3,256 
2,751 
2,103 
3,807 

13,978 



14,507 



1,042 
6,661 
1,613 
6,112 

15,428 



606 

745 

2,629 

1,309 

5,289 



915 
979 
664 
2,534 
607 

5,699 



3,901 
3,888 
7,029 

14,813 
36,283 



192 



MOTOR VEHICLE CRIMINAL CASE FILINGS AND 
DISPOSITIONS IN THE DISTRICT COURTS 

July 1, 1987 - June 30, 1988 

Dispositions 



District 27* 



Cherokee 

Clay 

Graham 

Haywood 

Jackson 

Macon 

Swain 

District Totals 

State Totals 



Total 
Piled 



Gaston 


12,477 


District 27B 

Clevsland 

Lincoln 


4,606 
2,731 


District Totals 


7,337 


District 28 
Buncombe 


9,372 


District 29 

Henderson 

McDowell 

Polk 

Rutherford 

Transylvania 


3,865 

1,553 

843 

3,555 

916 


District Totals 


10,732 


District 30 





1 


,162 




254 




290 


2 


,365 


1 


,148 




850 




567 


6 


,636 


419 


,407 



Wlllver 
3,109 



1,075 
1,761 



3,276 



1,147 
545 
287 
399 
233 

3,111 



29 3 
60 
52 

518 
321 
179 

114 

1,542 
100,523 



Other 


Total Dispositions 


8,533 


11,647 


2,938 


4,013 


1,951 


2,637 


4,889 


6,650 


5,730 


9,006 


2,105 


3,252 


860 


1,405 


581 


868 


2,397 


3,296 


641 


374 



6,584 



9,695 



901 


1,199 


191 


251 


219 


271 


1,492 


2,010 


300 


1,121 


699 


378 


314 


428 


4,616 


6,158 


1,332 


401,355 



193 



CASELOAD INVENTORY FOR CRIMINAL NON-MOTOR VEHICLE CASES 

IN THE DISTRICT COURTS 

July 1, 1987 - June 30, 1988 





Begin 












End 




Pending 




Total 




% 


Caseload 


Pending 




7/1/87 


Filed 


Caseload 


Disposed 


D 


isposed 


6/30/88 


District 1 
















Camden 


20 


194 


214 


13 7 




87.47. 


27 


Chowan 


37 


321 


358 


678 




79.0% 


180 


Currituck 


16 


565 


601 


496 




82. 52 


105 


Dare 


'4/0 


2,992 


3,462 


2,892 




83.5% 


570 


Gates 


27 


357 


334 


351 




91.4% 


33 


Pasquotank 


L81 


2,243 


2,424 


2,223 




91.9% 


196 


Perquimans 


41 


4o5 


506 


451 




89.1% 


55 



District Totals 



812 



7,637 



3,449 



7,233 



$6.2% 



1,166 



District 2 

Beaufort 

Hyde 

Martin 

Tyrrell 

Washington 



217 
67 
9 2 
24 
36 



3,344 


3,561 


3,207 


522 


589 


541 


1,526 


1,613 


1,254 


278 


302 


275 


926 


962 


910 



90.1% 


354 


91.9% 


48 


77.5% 


364 


91.1% 


27 


94.6% 


52 



District Totals 



436 



6,596 



7,032 



6,187 



88.0% 



845 



District 3 

Carteret 

Craven 

Pamlico 

Pitt 



913 

915 

77 

1,291 



5,186 


6,099 


5,074 


6,592 


7,507 


6,551 


723 


800 


669 


3,063 


14,354 


12,394 



83.2% 


1,025 


87.3% 


956 


33.6% 


131 


36.3% 


1,960 



District Totals 



3,196 



25,564 



28,760 



24,683 



85.3% 



4,072 



District 4 



Duplin 




245 


Jones 




35 


Onslow 


1 


,206 


Sampson 




401 


District Totals 


1 


,387 


District 5 






New Hanover 


2 


,244 


Pender 




280 


District Totals 


2 


,524 


District 6 






Bertie 




7o 


Halifax 




506 


Hertford 




103 


Northampton 




8 1 


District Totals 




763 


District 7 






Edgecombe 


1 


,095 


Nash 


1 


,231 


Wilson 


1 


,328 


District Totals 


3 


,654 


District 8 







Greene 
Lenoir 
Wayne 



125 

849 

1,060 



3,105 


3,350 


2,861 


534 


569 


520 


12,231 


13,437 


12,281 


3,629 


4,030 


3,553 



19,499 



15,571 
1,777 

17,348 



8,766 



20,389 



21,386 



17,815 
2,057 

19,872 



9,534 



24,043 



19,215 



15,438 
1,761 

17,199 



1,364 


1,442 


1,292 


4,457 


4,963 


4,444 


1,906 


2,009 


1,790 


1,039 


1,120 


1,021 



8,547 



5,755 


6,850 


5,639 


3,433 


9,664 


7,601 


6,201 


7,529 


5,313 



19,053 



966 


1,091 


924 


4,732 


5,531 


4,739 


7,040 


3,100 


6,802 



85.4% 


43 9 


91.4% 


49 


91.4% 


1,156 


38.2% 


477 



39.8% 



86.7% 
35.6% 

86.5% 



89.6% 



79.2% 



2,171 



2,377 
296 

2,673 



89.6% 


150 


39.5% 


519 


89.1% 


219 


91.2% 


99 



937 



32.3% 


1,211 


78.7% 


2,063 


77.2% 


1,716 



4,990 



84.7% 


167 


34.9% 


342 


84.0% 


1,298 



District Totals 



2,034 



12,738 



14,772 



12,465 



84.4% 



2,307 



194 



CASELOAD INVENTORY FOR CRIMINAL NON-MOTOR VEHICLE CASES 

IN THE DISTRICT COURTS 

July 1, 1987 - June 30, 1988 





Begin 












End 




Pending 




Total 




% 


Caseload 


Pending 




7/1/87 


Filed 


Caseload 


Disposed 


D 


isposed 


6/30/88 


District 9 
















Franklin 


197 


2,663 


2,860 


2,563 




89. 6% 


297 


Granville 


224 


2,508 


2,7 32 


2,440 




89.3% 


292 


Person 


241 


2,276 


2,517 


2,194 




87.2% 


12 3 


Vance 


275 


4,696 


4,971 


4,341 




37.3% 


630 


Warren 


115 


975 


1,090 


968 




88.8% 


m 



District Totals 



1,052 



13,118 



14,170 



12,506 



1.3% 



1,664 



District 10 




Wake 


7,300 


District 11 




Harnett 


564 


Johnston 


740 


Lee 


414 



34,122 



41,422 



32,771 



79.1% 



8,651 



4,487 


5,051 


4,416 


87.4% 


635 


5,651 


6,391 


5,572 


87.2% 


319 


4,361 


4,775 


4,312 


90.3% 


463 



District Totals 



District 12 



1,718 



14,499 



16,217 



14,300 



.2% 



1,917 



Cumberland 


4,533 


21,638 


26,171 


22,132 


84.6% 


4,039 


Hoke 


304 


2,205 


2,509 


2,141 


85.3% 


368 


District Totals 


4,837 


23,843 


28,680 


24,273 


84.6% 


4,407 


District 13 















Bladen 

Brunswick 

Columbus 

District Totals 

District 14 



Durham 




District 


15A 


Alamance 




District 


15B 



District Totals 



347 
483 
456 

1,236 



4,427 



913 



264 

708 

972 



2,401 


2,748 


2,455 


89.3% 


293 


3,067 


3,550 


2,394 


81.5% 


656 


4,079 


4,535 


4,061 


39.5% 


474 


9,547 


10,833 


9,410 


86.9% 


1,423 


7,736 


22,163 


16,596 


74.9% 


5,567 



7,064 



2,577 
4,870 

7,447 



7,977 



2,841 
5,578 

8,419 



7,010 



2,469 
4,886 

7,355 



87.9% 



86.9% 
87.6% 

37.4% 



967 



372 
692 

1,064 



District 16 




Robeson 


1,074 


Scotland 


306 


District Totals 


1,380 


District 17A 




Caswell 


107 


Rockingham 


573 


District Totals 


680 


District 17B 




Stokes 


180 


Surry 


480 



11,930 
4,849 

16,779 



6,977 



13,004 
5,155 

18,159 



7,657 



11,473 
4,636 

16,114 



6,850 



88.3% 
89.9% 

88.7% 



89.5% 



1,526 
519 

2,045 



1,043 


1,150 


1,042 


90.6% 


108 


5,934 


6,507 


5,308 


89.3% 


699 



807 



1,658 


1,338 


1,603 


37.2% 


235 


3,473 


3,953 


3,434 


86.9% 


519 



District Totals 



660 



5,131 



5,791 



5,037 



87.0% 



754 



195 



CASELOAD INVENTORY FOR CRIMINAL NON-MOTOR VEHICLE CASES 

IN THE DISTRICT COURTS 

July 1, 1987 - June 30, 1988 





Begin 










End 




Pending 




Total 




% Caseload 


Pending 




7/1/87 


Filed 


Caseload 


Disposed 


Disposed 


6/30/88 


District 18 














Guilford 


10,77d 


33,400 


44,173 


30,570 


69.2'. 


13,608 


District 19A 














Cabarrus 


628 


5,672 


6,300 


5,493 


87. 2% 


807 


Rowan 


575 


5,509 


6,034 


5,334 


37.7?. 


750 


District Totals 


1,203 


11,181 


12,334 


10,827 


87.4% 


1,557 


District 193 














Montgomery 


34') 


2,444 


2,793 


2,330 


35.2% 


413 


Randolph 


1,083 


6,133 


7,221 


5,816 


30.5% 


1,405 


District Totals 


1,437 


3,577 


10,014 


8,196 


81.3% 


1,313 


District 20 














Anson 


L93 


2,126 


2,319 


2,056 


38.7% 


263 


Moore 


497 


4,433 


4,9 30 


4,295 


8 7.1% 


635 


Richmond 


201 


4,164 


4,365 


3,921 


39.3% 


444 


Stanly 


253 


2,711 


2,964 


2,603 


87.3% 


361 


Union 


602 


4,667 


5,269 


4,683 


38.9% 


536 


District Totals 


1,746 


18,101 


19,847 


17,558 


83.5% 


2,289 


District 21 














Forsyth 


3,580 


21,068 


24,643 


21,365 


36.7% 


3,233 


District 22 














Alexander 


170 


1,337 


2,007 


1,796 


39.5% 


211 


Davidson 


1,211 


3,643 


9,354 


3,481 


36.1% 


1,373 


Davie 


152 


1,231 


1,383 


1,184 


85.6% 


199 


Iredell 


912 


3,439 


9,351 


8,082 


86.4% 


1,269 


District Totals 


2,445 


20,150 


22,595 


19,543 


86.5% 


3,052 


District 23 














Alleghany 


29 


356 


385 


361 


93.3% 


24 


Ashe 


67 


682 


749 


647 


86.4% 


102 


Wilkes 


500 


3,334 


4,334 


3,799 


87.7% 


535 


Yadkin 


80 


1,021 


1,101 


1,025 


93.1? 


76 


District Totals 


676 


5,893 


6,569 


5,832 


88.3% 


737 


District 24 














Avery 


155 


628 


733 


616 


78.7% 


167 


Madison 


148 


6 3b 


804 


683 


85.0% 


121 


Mitchell 


103 


629 


732 


644 


88.0% 


88 


Watauga 


2 5(, 


1,656 


1,912 


1,543 


80.7% 


369 


Yancey 


40 


429 


469 


404 


86.1% 


65 


District Totals 


702 


3,998 


4,700 


3,390 


82.8% 


810 


District 25 














Burke 


466 


4,535 


5,001 


4,419 


88.4% 


582 


Caldwell 


774 


4,112 


4,886 


4,393 


89.9% 


493 


Catawba 


1,118 


7,679 


8,797 


7,527 


85.6% 


1,270 


District Totals 


2,358 


16,326 


18,684 


16,339 


87.4% 


2,345 


District 26 














Mecklenburg 


8,902 


44,055 


52,957 


43,396 


81.9% 


9,561 



196 



CASELOAD INVENTORY FOR CRIMINAL NON-MOTOR VEHICLE CASES 

IN THE DISTRICT COURTS 

July 1, 1987 - June 30, 1988 







It 


e«in 










End 






Pending 




Total 




% Caseload 


I'endinK 






7/1/87 


Piled 


Caseload 


Disposed 


Disposed 


6/30/88 


Distclct 27* 


















Gaston 




3 


,278 


14,445 


17,723 


14,221 


80.2% 


3,502 


District 27B 


















Cleveland 






524 


5,036 


5,560 


4,749 


85.4% 


dll 


Lincoln 






332 


3,392 


3,724 


3,244 


37.1% 


480 


District Xo 


tal 




356 


8,428 


9,284 


7,993 


36.1% 


1,291 


District 28 


















Buncombe 




1 


,653 


15,434 


17,087 


15,251 


39.3% 


1,836 


District 29 


















Henderson 






553 


3,9 34 


4,437 


3,749 


83.6% 


7 38 


McDowell 






290 


2,063 


2,35 3 


2,055 


8 7.3% 


298 


Polk 






100 


603 


703 


604 


85.9% 


99 


Rutherford 






871 


3,808 


4,679 


3,712 


79.3% 


967 


Transylvania 






290 


1,520 


1,310 


1,492 


82.4% 


313 


District Total 


2 


,104 


11,928 


14,032 


11,512 


82.8% 


2,420 


District 30 


















Cherokee 






771 


1,242 


2,013 


1,482 


73.6% 


531 


Clay 






36 


380 


416 


348 


83.7% 


68 


Graham 






33 


38 7 


420 


327 


77.9% 


93 


Haywood 






337 


2,585 


2,922 


2,677 


91.6% 


245 


Jackson 






77 


1,003 


1,080 


946 


37.6% 


134 


Macon 






123 


681 


309 


660 


81.6% 


149 


Swain 






49 


648 


697 


637 


91.4% 


60 


District To 


tal 


1 


,431 


6,926 


8,357 


7,077 


34.7% 


1,280 


State Totals 




83 


,685 


514,710 


598,395 


500,529 


83.6% 


97,366 



197 



MANNER OF DISPOSITION OF DISTRICT COURT 
CRIMINAL NON-MOTOR VEHICLE CASES 

July 1, 1987 - June 30, 1988 

MISDEMEANORS 

Waivers 
(56,473) 



Guilty Plea 
(177,010) 




Other 
(41,640) 



Dismissals 
(138,798) 



Not Guilty Plea (Trial) 
(41,119) 



FELONY PROBABLE CAUSE MATTERS 

Probable Cause Not Found 
(2,736) 



Probable Cause Hearing 
Waived 
(17,097) 




Heard and Bound Over 
(7,964) 



Superceding 

Indictment 

(17,692) 



Guilty pleas predominate in the disposition of criminal 
non-motor vehicle cases in the district courts. The waivers 
referred to in the upper chart are waivers of trial in 
worthless check cases where the defendant pleads guilty 
before a magistrate. The "Other" category includes 



changes of venue, waivers of extradition, findings of no 
probable cause at initial appearance, and dismissals by 
the court. The proportion of distrct court felony cases 
superceded by indictment increased again this year from 

34.1% to 38.9%. 



198 



MANNER OF DISPOSITION OF CRIMINAL 

NON-MOTOR VEHICLE CASES IN THE 

DISTRICT COURTS 

July 1, 1987 - June 30, 1988 



■ 
















Felony 








Worthless 
Check 
Waiver 


Guilty 


Plea 


Not 

Guilty 

Plea 


Dismissed 
by 
DA 


Other 


Probable 

Cause 

Matters 


Total 




Judge 


Magistrate 


Disposed 


District 1 




















Camden 







64 


19 


32 


29 


28 


15 


137 


Chowan 




1) 


341 


4 \ 


76 


106 


2 


96 


678 


Currituck 




15 


284 


1 


49 


86 


33 


23 


496 


Dare 




122 


989 


20 


2 33 


625 


685 


213 


2,892 


Gates 




13 


141 


24 


72 


44 


4 


53 


351 


Pasquotank 




114 


633 


7b 


500 


457 


132 


216 


2,228 


Perquimans 




14 


182 


15 


32 


84 


22 


52 


451 


District To 


tals 


291 


2,634 


199 


1,049 


1,431 


956 


673 


7,283 


% of Total 




4.0% 


36.9% 


2.7% 


14.4% 


19.6% 


13.1% 


9.2% 


100.0% 


District 2 




















Beaufort 




281 


1,091 


3 53 


460 


314 


368 


355 


3,207 


Hyde 




2 


123 


147 


104 


75 


32 


53 


541 


Martin 




211 


363 


43 


149 


126 


191 


171 


1,254 


Tyrrell 




8 


73 


34 


34 


32 


19 


25 


275 


Washington 




124 


245 


74 


130 


55 


5b 


176 


910 


District Totals 


626 


1,900 


686 


927 


602 


666 


780 


6,187 


% of Total 




10.1% 


30.7% 


11.1% 


15.0% 


9.7% 


10.8% 


12.6% 


100.0% 


District 3 




















Carteret 




563 


1,266 


628 


156 


1,781 


403 


277 


5,074 


Craven 




1,053 


2,083 


362 


363 


1,604 


638 


438 


6,551 


Pamlico 




10 


227 


130 


72 


160 


64 


6 


669 


Pitt 




3,028 


3,950 


30 7 


398 


2,307 


590 


1,254 


12,394 


District To 


tals 


4,654 


7,531 


1,487 


1,494 


5,852 


1,695 


1,975 


24,688 


% of Total 




18.9% 


30.5% 


6.0% 


6.1% 


23.7% 


6.9% 


8.0% 


100.0% 


District 4 




















Duplin 




447 


987 


53 


153 


451 


133 


632 


2,861 


Jones 




17 


109 


2 


42 


106 


172 


72 


520 


Onslow 




2,706 


4,714 


252 


534 


1,596 


1,035 


1,444 


12,281 


Sampson 




704 


1,406 


69 


101 


664 


172 


437 


3,553 


District To 


tals 


3,874 


7,216 


376 


835 


2,817 


1,512 


2,585 


19,215 


% of Total 




20.2% 


37.6% 


2.0% 


4.3% 


14.7% 


7.9% 


13.5% 


100.0% 


District 5 




















New Hanover 




1,462 


5,652 


681 


1,328 


3,145 


1,064 


2,106 


15,438 


Pender 




44 


784 


39 


150 


432 


74 


238 


1,761 


District To 


tals 


1,506 


6,436 


720 


1,478 


3,577 


1,138 


2,344 


17,199 


% of Total 




8.8% 


37.4% 


4.2% 


8.6% 


20.8% 


6.6% 


13.6% 


100.0% 


District 6 




















Bertie 




72 


443 


17 


140 


207 


302 


111 


1,292 


Halifax 




286 


1,751 


234 


413 


1,014 


314 


427 


4,444 


Hertford 




181 


812 


1 


97 


227 


327 


145 


1,790 


Northampton 




64 


373 


20 


125 


214 


113 


107 


1,021 


District Totals 


603 


3,384 


272 


730 


1,662 


1,056 


790 


3,547 


% of Total 




7.1% 


39.6% 


3.2% 


9.1% 


19.4% 


12.4% 


9.2% 


100.0% 


District 7 




















Edgecombe 




757 


1,900 


272 


699 


1,278 


384 


349 


5,639 


Nash 




1,830 


2,425 


240 


693 


1,397 


355 


661 


7,601 


Wilson 




899 


2,008 


213 


548 


1,365 


237 


543 


5,313 


District Totals 


3,486 


6,333 


725 


1,940 


4,040 


976 


1,553 


19,053 


% of Total 




18.3% 


33.2% 


3.8% 


10.2% 


21.2% 


5.1% 


8.2% 


100.0% 



199 



MANNER OF DISPOSITION OF CRIMINAL 

NON-MOTOR VEHICLE CASES IN THE 

DISTRICT COURTS 

July 1, 1987 - June 30, 1988 





Wortlilcss 
Check 
Waiver 


Guilty 


Plea 


Not 

Guilty 

Plea 


Dismissed 
by 

DA 


Other 


Felony 

Probable 

Cause 

Matters 


Total 




Judge 


Magistrate 


Disposed 


District 8 
Greene 
Lenoir 
Uayne 


68 

417 
955 


244 
1,427 
1,904 


56 
69 

9 5 


64 
311 

324 


335 
1,800 
2,636 


74 
42 7 
378 


33 
288 
510 


924 
4,739 

6,802 


District Totals 
X of Total 


1,440 
11.6% 


3,575 
28.72 


220 

1.3% 


699 
5.6% 


4,771 
38.3% 


879 
7.1% 


381 
7.1% 


12,465 

100.0% 


District 9 

Franklin 

Granville 

Person 

Vance 

Warren 


373 
413 
20b 
50 3 

60 


791 
760 
678 
1,397 
230 


200 

5 '> 
134 

in 

33 


308 
245 
274 
656 
207 


454 
409 
431 
342 
244 


18 3 
302 
169 

460 

148 


254 
251 
282 

2 56 
41 


2,563 

2,440 

2,194 

4,341 

968 


District Totals 
% of Total 


1,560 
12.52 


3,856 
30.8% 


674 
5.4% 


1,690 
13.5% 


2,380 
19.0% 


1,262 

10. H 


1,084 
8.7% 


12,506 
100.0% 


District 10 
Wake 

% of Total 


5,952 

18. 2% 


8,011 
24.4% 


2,725 
3.3% 


1,655 
5.1% 


9,471 
28.9% 


1,590 
4.9% 


3,367 
10.3% 


32,771 
100.0% 


District 11 
Harnett 
Johnston 
Lee 


593 
842 
315 


1,495 
1,345 
1,304 


145 
270 

lib 


283 

43 1 
39 3 


916 

1,064 

302 


7 00 
745 

324 


274 
325 
373 


4,416 
5,572 

4,312 


District Totals 
% of Total 


2,255 
15.8% 


4,644 
32.5% 


711 
5.0% 


1,162 

3.1% 


2,782 
19.5% 


1,769 
12.4% 


977 
6.8% 


14,300 

100.0% 


District 12 

Cumberland 

Hoke 


4,794 
346 


6,449 
12 


124 
3 


1,361 
1,086 


7,049 
383 


666 

154 


1,689 
152 


22,132 
2,141 


District Totals 
% of Total 


5,140 
21.2% 


6,461 
26.6% 


127 
0.5% 


2,447 
10.1% 


7,437 
30.6% 


820 

3.4% 


1,841 

7.6% 


24,273 
100.0% 


District 13 
Bladen 
Brunswick 
Columbus 


344 

166 
834 


701 
1,057 
1,533 


4 9 

330 

33 


455 

193 
332 


53u 
925 
862 


224 

52 

306 


96 

171 
161 


2,455 
2,894 
4,061 


District Totals 
% of Total 


1,344 
14.3% 


3,291 

35.0% 


412 

4.4% 


930 

10.4% 


2,373 
25.2% 


582 

6.2% 


428 

4.5% 


9,410 
100.0% 


District 14 
Durham 

% of Total 


1,407 

8.5% 


6,225 

37.5% 


4 
0.0% 


1,110 
6.7% 


4,638 
27.9% 


1,732 
10.4% 


1,480 
8.9% 


16,596 

100.0% 


District 15A 
Alamance 
% of Total 


586 

8.4% 


2,997 
42.8% 


298 
4.3% 


653 
9.3% 


1,432 

20.4% 


396 

5.6% 


648 
9.2% 


7,010 
100.0% 


District 15B 

Chatham 

Orange 


202 
633 


597 
1,286 


20 7 
133 


112 
143 


560 
1,615 


646 
360 


145 

Obi 


2,469 
4,886 


District Totals 
% of Total 


835 

11.4% 


1,883 
25.6% 


390 
5.3% 


260 
3.5% 


2,175 
29.6% 


1,006 
13.7% 


806 

11.0% 


7,355 

100.0% 


District 16 

Robeson 

Scotland 


1,611 
613 


4,427 
2,009 


220 

89 


1,472 
546 


635 
465 


1,248 
482 


1,865 
432 


11,478 
4,636 


District Totals 
% of Total 


2,224 
13.8% 


6,436 
39.9% 


309 

1.9% 


2,018 
12.5% 


1,100 
6.8% 


1,7 30 
10.7% 


2,297 
14.3% 


16,114 

100.0% 



200 



MANNER OF DISPOSITION OF CRIMINAL 
NON-MOTOR VEHICLE CASES IN THE 

DISTRICT COURTS 

July 1, 1987 - June 30, 1988 



















Felony 








Worthless 


Guiljy 


Plea 


Not 


Dismissed 




Probable 








Check 
Waiver 


Guilty 
Pica 


by 

DA 


Other 


Cause 
Matters 


Total 




Judge 


Magistrate 


Disposed 


District 17A 




















Caswell 




51 


227 


39 


282 


1/6 


115 


L02 


1,042 


Rockingham 




369 


2,013 


L65 


966 


823 


502 


910 


5,808 


District Totals 


420 


2,240 


254 


1,248 


999 


677 


1,012 


6,850 


% of Total 




6.1% 


32.7% 


3.7% 


18.2% 


14.6% 


9.9% 


14.3% 


100.0% 


District 17B 




















S tokes 




196 


39 3 


19 


180 


238 


236 


241 


1,603 


Surry 




320 


1,044 


225 


354 


642 


316 


533 


3,434 


District Totals 


516 


1,437 


244 


534 


930 


602 


774 


5,037 


% of Total 




10.2% 


28.5% 


4.8% 


10.6% 


18.5% 


12.0% 


15.4% 


100.0% 


District 18 




















Guilford 




1,361 


8,984 


1,109 


1,629 


12,930 


1,341 


2,666 


30,570 


% of Total 




A. 5% 


29.4% 


3.6? 


5.3% 


42.5% 


6.0% 


8.7% 


100.0% 


District 19A 




















Cabarrus 




710 


1,545 


205 


749 


1,119 


408 


757 


5,493 


Rowan 




509 


1,506 


98 


733 


1,042 


715 


726 


5,334 


District To 


tals 


1,219 


3,051 


303 


1,437 


2,161 


1,123 


1,483 


10,827 


% of Total 




11.3% 


28.2% 


2.8% 


13.7% 


20.0% 


10.4% 


13.7? 


100.0% 


District 19B 




















Montgomery 




190 


582 


405 


204 


591 


2b 7 


141 


2,380 


Randolph 




1,041 


1,995 


35 


533 


1,558 


169 


485 


5,816 


District To 


tals 


1,231 


2,577 


440 


737 


2,149 


436 


626 


8,196 


% of Total 




15.0% 


31.4% 


5.4% 


9.0% 


26.2% 


5.3% 


7.6% 


100.0% 


District 20 




















Anson 




81 


66 


208 


341 


501 


13b 


173 


2,056 


Moore 




684 


1,129 


451 


459 


337 


243 


487 


4,295 


Richmond 




318 


1,294 


125 


480 


796 


398 


510 


3,921 


Stanly 




250 


728 


286 


346 


435 


309 


19 9 


2,603 


Union 




734 


1,460 


123 


574 


355 


42 7 


510 


4,683 


District To 


tals 


2,067 


4,677 


1,193 


2,700 


3,474 


1,568 


1,879 


17,558 


% of Total 




11.3% 


26.6% 


6.8% 


15.4% 


19.3% 


8.9% 


10.7% 


100.0% 


District 21 




















Forsyth 




1,372 


6,979 





2,698 


6,172 


1,760 


2,384 


21,365 


% of Total 




6.4% 


32.7% 


0.0% 


12.6% 


28.9% 


8.2% 


11.2% 


100.0% 


District 22 




















Alexander 




85 


542 


1 


133 


593 


336 


101 


1,796 


Davidson 




437 


2,614 


256 


538 


3,385 


804 


447 


8,481 


Davie 




74 


335 


61 


115 


371 


171 


57 


1,184 


Iredell 




655 


2,758 


364 


515 


2,666 


711 


413 


8,082 


District To 


tals 


1,251 


6,249 


632 


1,306 


7,015 


2,022 


1,018 


19,543 


% of Total 




6.4% 


32.0% 


3.5% 


6.7% 


35.9% 


10.3% 


5.2% 


100.0% 


District 23 




















Alleghany 




49 


30 


16 


149 


67 


30 


20 


361 


Ashe 




89 


187 





112 


28 


179 


52 


647 


Wilkes 




324 


1,555 


132 


572 


665 


283 


268 


3,799 


Yadkin 




57 


323 


4 


272 


135 


b7 


167 


1,025 


District To 


tals 


519 


2,095 


152 


1,105 


895 


559 


507 


5,832 


% of Total 




8.9% 


35.9% 


2.6% 


18.9% 


15.3% 


9.6% 


8.7% 


100.0% 



201 



MANNER OF DISPOSITION OF CRIMINAL 

NON-MOTOR VEHICLE CASES IN THE 

DISTRICT COURTS 

July 1, 1987 - June 30, 1988 

















Felony 






Worthless 
Check 
Waiver 


Guilty 


Plea 


Not 

Guilty 

Plea 


Dismissed 
by 

DA 


Other 


Pro ha bit 

Cause 

Matters 


Total 




Judge 


Magistrate 


Disposed 


District 24 


















Avery 


63 


56 


2 


3 3 


208 


137 


o2 


616 


Madison 


17 


66 





35 


268 


204 


93 


683 


Mitchell 


113 


86 


41 


62 


179 


in 


50 


644 


Watauga 


345 


239 


23 


63 


518 


132 


163 


1,543 


Yancey 


46 


2 


53 


112 


113 


14 


34 


404 


District Totals 


589 


499 


129 


360 


1,291 


600 


422 


3,890 


% of Total 


15.1% 


12.8% 


3.3% 


9.3% 


3 3 . 2 X 


15.4% 


10.8% 


100.0% 


District 25 


















Burke 


435 


1,397 


55 


246 


1,204 


612 


470 


4,419 


Caldwell 


371 


1,413 


276 


253 


1,046 


434 


600 


4,393 


Catawba 


859 


2,524 


154 


559 


1,345 


324 


762 


7,527 


District Totals 


1,665 


5,334 


435 


1,058 


4,095 


1,370 


1,832 


16,339 


% of Total 


10.2% 


32.6% 


3.0% 


6.52 


25.1% 


11.4% 


11.2% 


100.0% 


District 26 


















Mecklenburg 


1,702 


11,441 


629 


1,566 


22,027 


4,794 


1,237 


43,396 


% of Total 


3.9/. 


26.4% 


1.4% 


3.6% 


50.8% 


11.0% 


2.97. 


100.0% 


District 27A 


















Gaston 


648 


3,981 


453 


1,083 


5,2 58 


1,363 


1,420 


14,221 


% of Total 


4.6% 


28.0% 


3.3% 


7.6% 


37.0% 


9.6% 


10.0% 


100.0% 


District 27B 


















Cleveland 


22 3 


1,582 


283 


372 


1,428 


476 


380 


4,749 


Lincoln 


314 


366 


344 


1 9 3 


312 


534 


179 


3,244 


District Totals 


537 


2,448 


632 


567 


2,240 


1,010 


559 


7,993 


% of Total 


6.7% 


30.6% 


7.9% 


7.1% 


28.0% 


12.6% 


7.0% 


100.0% 


District 28 


















Buncombe 


2,580 


7,449 


213 


604 


3,333 


234 


838 


15,251 


% of Total 


16.9% 


48.8% 


1.4% 


4.0% 


21.9% 


1.5% 


5.5% 


100.0% 


District 29 


















Henderson 


27} 


1,370 


253 


133 


998 


474 


241 


3,749 


McDowell 


147 


580 


2 34 


157 


430 


124 


i>ii 


2,055 


Polk 


4 


269 


14 


26 


220 


43 


28 


604 


Rutherford 


17 3 


1,416 


239 


432 


912 


164 


>,:•., 


3,712 


Transylvania 


75 


475 


283 


32 


4 29 


37 


156 


1,492 


District Totals 


674 


4,110 


1,033 


330 


2,989 


842 


1,134 


11,612 


% of Total 


5.8% 


35.4% 


8.9% 


7.1% 


25.7% 


7.3% 


9.8% 


100.0% 


District 30 


















Cherokee 


137 


375 


13 


12 


447 


250 


273 


1,482 


Clay 


21 


149 


23 


n 


109 


5 


19 


348 


Graham 





84 


1 


94 


115 


16 


17 


327 


Haywood 


129 


794 


136 


173 


898 


147 


400 


2,677 


Jackson 


29 


201 


111 


42 


252 


34 


277 


946 


Macon 


33 


165 


54 


52 


205 


92 


59 


660 


Swain 


20 


111 


78 


33 


2 24 


25 


144 


o37 


District Totals 


339 


1,379 


421 


430 


2,250 


569 


1,189 


7,077 


% of Total 


4.8% 


26.6% 


5.9% 


6.1% 


31.8% 


8.0% 


16.8% 


100.0% 


State Totals 


56,473 


158,293 


18,717 


41,119 


138,793 


41,640 


45,489 


500,529 


% of Total 


11.3% 


31.6% 


3.7% 


8.2% 


27.7% 


8.3% 


9.1% 


100.0% 



202 



AGES OF PENDING CRIMINAL NON-MOTOR 
VEHICLE CASES IN THE DISTRICT COURTS 

Ages of Cases Pending June 30, 1988 

Ages of Pending Cases (Days) 









»,,<... V,. . ......... 


b V,«^^^ y~»j~ 






Total 
Pending 


Mean 
Age 


Median 




0-90 


91-120 


121-180 


181-365 


366-730 


>730 


Age 


District 1 




















Camden 


25 


2 














27 


23.5 


14.0 


Chowan 


90 


12 


40 


JO 


7 


1 


180 


121.1 


90.0 


Currituck 


63 


4 


11 


18 


4 





105 


87.7 


37.0 


Dare 


515 


11 


17 


22 


4 


1 


570 


37.5 


16.0 


Gates 


23 


4 


1 











33 


43.7 


35.0 


Pasquotank 


175 


7 


10 


3 


1 





19 b 


38.9 


24.0 


Perquimans 


43 





2 


4 


1 





55 


51.3 


27.0 


District Totals 


949 


40 


31 


77 


17 


2 


1,166 


55.7 


23.0 


% of Total 


81.4% 


3.4% 


6.9% 


6.6% 


1.5% 


0.2% 


100.0% 






District 2 




















Beaufort 


226 


9 


19 


/I 


2 3 


6 


354 


127.3 


38.0 


Hyde 


46 








2 








48 


30.6 


12.0 


Martin 


236 


5 


105 


13 








364 


82.5 


56.0 


Tyrrell 


25 








I 


1 





27 


43.9 


28.0 


Washington 


50 








1 


I 





52 


34.6 


17.0 


District Totals 


583 


14 


124 


93 


25 


6 


845 


94.1 


52.0 


% of Total 


69.0% 


1.7% 


14.7% 


11.0% 


3.0% 


0.7% 


100.0% 






District 3 




















Carteret 


795 


57 


9/ 


53 


16 


7 


1,025 


72.5 


37.0 


Craven 


677 


o3 


98 


77 


lb 


20 


956 


95.5 


35.0 


Pamlico 


88 


9 


8 


20 


6 





131 


91.1 


41.0 


Pitt 


1,549 


133 


168 


102 


3 





1,960 


57.6 


37.0 


District Totals 


3,109 


267 


371 


252 


46 


27 


4,072 


71.3 


37.0 


% of Total 


76.4% 


6.6% 


9.1 X 


6.2% 


1.1% 


0.7% 


100.0% 






District 4 




















Duplin 


438 


13 


12 


20 


6 





489 


49.5 


29.0 


Jones 


49 

















49 


36.5 


37.0 


Onslow 


944 


3o 


82 


41 


3 





1,156 


53.2 


36.0 


Sampson 


350 


86 


23 


17 


1 





477 


60.6 


49.0 


District Totals 


1,781 


185 


117 


78 


10 





2,171 


53.6 


36.0 


% of Total 


82.0% 


8.5% 


5.4% 


3.6% 


0.5% 


0.0% 


100.0% 






District 5 




















New Hanover 


1,589 


112 


18 5 


304 


131 


56 


2,377 


127.9 


51.0 


Pender 


19 5 


19 


8 


35 


25 


14 


296 


152.1 


62.0 


District Totals 


1,784 


131 


193 


339 


156 


70 


2,673 


130.6 


51.0 


% of Total 


66.7% 


4.9% 


7.2% 


12.7% 


5.8% 


2.6% 


100.0% 






District 6 




















Bertie 


106 


10 


10 


21 


3 





150 


75.8 


23.0 


Halifax 


339 


58 


61 


53 


3 





519 


79.4 


41.0 


Hertford 


19 3 


8 


11 


1 


4 


2 


219 


53.0 


29.0 


Northampton 


8 3 


2 


3 


10 


1 





99 


57.7 


27.0 


District Totals 


721 


78 


85 


90 


11 


2 


987 


70.8 


34.0 


% of Total 


73.0% 


7.9% 


8.6% 


9.1% 


1.1% 


0.2% 


100.0% 






District 7 




















Edgecombe 


785 


109 


98 


145 


65 


9 


1,211 


107.0 


56.0 


Nash 


1,277 


265 


233 


209 


57 


22 


2,063 


97.1 


59.0 


Wilson 


899 


143 


214 


285 


153 


22 


1,716 


149.1 


86.0 


District Totals 


2,961 


517 


545 


639 


275 


53 


4,990 


117.4 


65.0 


% of Total 


59.3% 


10.4% 


10.9% 


12.8% 


5.5% 


1.1% 


100.0% 







203 



AGES OF PENDING CRIMINAL NON-MOTOR 
VEHICLE CASES IN THE DISTRICT COURTS 

Ages of Cases Pending June 30, 1988 

Ages of Pending Cases (Days) 



District 8 
Greene 
Lenoir 
Wayne 



0-90 

132 
629 



91-120 



District Totals 1,697 
% of Total 73.62 

District? 



Franklin 


225 


Granville 


2 31 


Person 


l')4 


Vance 


4ri3 


Warren 


79 


District Totals 


1,212 


% of Total 


72.8% 


District 10 




Wake 


4,094 


% of Total 


47.3% 


District 11 




Harnett 


409 


Johnston 


622 


Lee 


406 


District Totals 


1,437 


% of Total 


75.0% 


District 12 




Cumberland 


2,751 


Hoke 


285 


District Totals 


3,036 


% of Total 


68.9% 


District 13 




Bladen 


243 


Brunswick 


353 


Columbus 


170 


District Totals 


971 


% of Total 


68.2% 


District 14 




Durham 


2,554 


% of Total 


45.9% 


District 15A 




Alamance 


745 


% of Total 


77.0% 


District 15B 




Chatham 


320 


Orange 


39 5 


District Totals 


715 


% of Total 


67.2% 


District 16 





Robeson 1,067 

Scotland 324 

District Totals 1,391 

% of Total 68.0% 



L8 

62 

113 

193 
8.4% 



22 

19 
13 
35 



95 
5.7% 



777 

9.0% 



u2 
60 
26 

148 
7.7% 



393 

29 

422 
9.6% 



13 
58 
2b 

97 
6.8% 



472 
8.5% 



46 

4.8% 



L6 

40 

56 
5.3% 



96 
52 

148 

7.2% 



121-180 

17 

57 
144 

213 
9.4% 



50 

11 

9 

2 5 

4 

79 
4.7% 



910 
10.5% 



68 

83 

12 

163 
8.5% 



422 

20 



442 

10.02 



6 

54 
44 

104 
7.3% 



428 
7.7% 



51 

5.3% 



13 

71 

84 
7.9% 



104 
29 

133 

6.5% 



181-365 


366-730 








69 


13 


34 


19 


153 


37 


6.6% 


1.6% 


19 


1 


13 


17 


10 1 


6 


50 


26 


9 


6 


192 


56 


11.5% 


3.4% 


1,503 


862 


17.4% 


10.0% 


61 


26 


51 


3 


14 


5 


126 


34 


6.6% 


1.8% 


413 


53 


14 


10 


427 


63 


9.7% 


1.4% 


18 


6 


135 


4 9 


23 


6 


176 


61 


12.4% 


4.3% 


656 


696 


11.8% 


12.5% 


106 


14 


11.0% 


1.4% 


22 


1 


102 


81 


124 


32 


11.7% 


7.7% 


200 


52 


63 


44 


263 


96 


12.9% 


4.7% 



>730 




7 
2 

9 

0.4% 





1 


11 

18 

30 
1.8% 



505 

5.8% 



4 



9 
0.5% 



7 

10 

17 

U.4% 



2 
7 

5 

14 
1.0% 



761 
13.7% 



5 

0.5% 





3 

3 

0.3% 



7 

7 

14 
0.7% 



Total 


Mean 


Median 


Pending 


Age 


Age 


In 7 


44.5 


27.0 


342 


81.3 


48.0 


1,298 


74.1 


48.0 


2,307 


74.7 


45.0 


100.0% 






297 


62.8 


35.0 


292 


74.1 


35.0 


Hi 


113.7 


44.0 


630 


90.8 


41.0 


122 


213.1 


25.0 


1,664 


97.2 


36.0 


100.0% 






8,651 


201.3 


99.0 


100.0% 






635 


119.8 


51.0 


819 


63.9 


36.0 


463 


46.8 


28.0 


1,917 


78.3 


37:0 


100.0% 






4,039 


82.6 


52.0 


^68 


86.1 


44.0 


4,407 


82.9 


51.0 


100.0% 






ZVi 


61.8 


29.0 


656 


139.1 


79.0 


474 


66.8 


29.0 


1,423 


99.1 


41.0 


100.0% 






5,567 


282.3 


101.0 


100.0% 






967 


72.3 


29.0 


100.0% 






372 


51.2 


27.0 


692 


138.3 


69.0 


1,064 


107.9 


44.0 


100.0% 






1,526 


88.6 


41.0 


519 


133.6 


42.0 


2,045 


100.0 


41.0 


100.0% 







204 



AGES OF PENDING CRIMINAL NON-MOTOR 
VEHICLE CASES IN THE DISTRICT COURTS 

Ages of Cases Pending June 30, 1988 

Ages of Pending Cases (Days) 





0-90 


91-120 


121-180 


181-365 


366-730 


>730 


Total 
Pending 


Mean 
Age 


Median 
Age 


District 17A 




















Caswell 
Rockingham 


102 
558 


1 

43 


2 

58 


2 
25 


1 
3 



2 


108 
699 


40.5 
55.0 


28.0 

27.0 


District Totals 
% of Total 


660 
81.3% 


49 
6.1% 


60 
7.4% 


27 

3.3% 


9 

1.1% 


2 
0.2% 


807 
100.0% 


53.1 


28.0 


District 17B 




















S tokes 
Surry 


199 

440 


20 
28 


5 

2/ 


6 

2 1 


5 
2 



1 


235 
519 


62.6 
52.5 


44.0 
34.0 


District Totals 
% of Total 


639 
84.7% 


48 
6.4% 


32 
4.2% 


27 
3.6% 


7 
0.9% 


1 

0.1% 


754 
100.0% 


55.7 


36.0 


District 18 




















Guilford 
% of Total 


6,6 32 
48.7% 


1,202 
3.3% 


1,727 
12.7% 


2,211 
16.2% 


1,507 
11.1% 


329 
2.4% 


13,608 
100.0% 


164.8 


94.0 


District 19A 




















Cabarrus 
Rowan 


654 
610 


41 
54 


54 
36 


46 
45 


12 

4 




1 


807 
750 


53.1 
54.8 


29.0 
23.0 


District Totals 
% of Total 


1,264 
31.2% 


95 
6.1% 


90 
5.8% 


91 
5.8% 


16 
1.0% 


1 
0.1% 


1,557 
100.0% 


56.5 


28.0 


District 19B 




















Montgomery 
Randolph 


270 
909 


16 
118 


25 
104 


74 
173 


1/ 
94 


11 

7 


413 
1,405 


125.7 
103.3 


48.0 
52.0 


District Totals 
% of Total 


1,179 
64.9% 


134 
7.4% 


129 
7.1% 


247 
13.6% 


111 

6.1? 


13 
1.0% 


1,818 
100.0% 


112.2 


52.0 


District 20 




















Anson 

Moore 

Richmond 

Stanly 

Union 


225 

410 
362 
342 
394 


8 
10 
25 

6 
39 


4 

34 

8 

4 

27 


11 

94 

47 

9 

42 


12 

79 

2 



28 


3 

8 





56 


263 
635 
444 
361 
586 


76.0 

124.6 

58.3 

31.3 

293.3 


29.0 
34.0 
27.0 
16.0 
34.0 


District Totals 
% of Total 


1,733 

75.7% 


83 
3.3% 


77 
3.4% 


203 
8.9% 


121 
5.3% 


67 
2.9% 


2,289 

100.0% 


134.6 


28.0 


District 21 




















Forsyth 
% of Total 


1,735 
52.8% 


160 

4.9% 


159 

4.8% 


594 
18.1% 


526 
16.0% 


109 
3.3% 


3,283 

100.0% 


194.8 


77.0 


District 22 




















Alexander 
Davidson 
Davie 
Iredell 


184 

1,133 

154 

996 


14 
59 
16 
68 


6 
75 
10 
59 


6 

57 

14 

114 


1 

24 

3 

26 




25 

2 

6 


211 
1,373 

199 
1,269 


46.2 
71.9 
76.1 
71.4 


34.0 
30.0 
43.0 
30.0 


District Totals 
% of Total 


2,467 

80.3% 


157 
5.1% 


150 

4.9% 


191 
6.3% 


54 
1.8% 


33 
1.1% 


3,052 
100.0% 


70.2 


30.0 


District 23 




















Alleghany 
Ashe 
Wilkes 
Yadkin 


17 

51 

309 

70 


1 

3 

33 

3 


1 



45 

1 


4 

9 

84 

2 


1 

28 

52 






11 
12 




24 
102 
535 

76 


83.5 
311.8 
137.2 

38.2 


37.0 
89.0 
69.0 
17.0 


District Totals 
% of Total 


447 
60.7% 


40 
5.4% 


47 
6.4% 


99 
13.4% 


31 
11.0% 


23 
3.1% 


737 
100.0% 


149.4 


52.0 



205 



AGES OF PENDING CRIMINAL NON-MOTOR 
VEHICLE CASES IN THE DISTRICT COURTS 

Ages of Cases Pending June 30, 1988 

Ages of Pending Cases (Days) 











b v _... v j~ 






Total 
Pending 


Mean 
Age 


Median 




0-90 


91-120 


121-180 


181-365 


366-730 


>730 


Age 


District 24 




















Avery 


86 


13 


22 


1/ 


18 


6 


167 


177.6 


86.0 


Madison 


42 


4 


14 


27 


29 


5 


121 


251.2 


191.0 


Mitchell 


54 


10 


8 


5 


5 


6 


88 


159.5 


56.0 


Watauga 


219 


32 


55 


52 


10 


I 


369 


103.5 


65.0 


Yancey 


4b 


? 


4 


b 


2 





65 


88.9 


57.0 


District Totals 


447 


71 


103 


107 


64 


18 


810 


145.8 


73.0 


% of Total 


55. 2% 


8.8% 


12.7% 


13.2% 


7.9% 


2.2% 


100.0% 






District 25 




















Burke 


529 


9 


21 


14 


3 


1 


532 


44.7 


22.0 


Caldwell 


405 


36 


26 


13 


12 


1 


493 


59.0 


30.0 


Catawba 


945 


130 


103 


54 


33 


5 


1,270 


73.8 


44.0 


District Totals 


1,879 


175 


150 


81 


5 3 


7 


2,345 


63.5 


35.0 


% of Total 


80.1% 


7.5% 


6.4% 


3.5% 


2.3% 


0.3% 


100.0% 






District 26 




















Mecklenburg 


5,307 


653 


1,005 


1,780 


643 


173 


9,561 


142.4 


74.0 


% of Total 


55.5% 


6.8% 


10.5% 


13.6% 


6.7% 


1.8% 


100.0% 






District 27A 




















Gaston 


2,290 


325 


380 


321 


111 


75 


3,502 


114.8 


55.0 


% of Total 


65.4% 


9.3% 


10.9% 


9.2% 


3.2% 


2.1% 


100.0% 






District 27B 




















Cleveland 


660 


6 2 


38 


38 


11 


2 


811 


58.2 


30.0 


Lincoln 


375 


22 


21 


34 


13 


10 


480 


94.2 


29.0 


District Totals 


1,035 


84 


59 


72 


29 


12 


1,291 


71.6 


30.0 


% of Total 


80.2% 


6.5% 


4.6% 


5.6% 


2.2% 


0.9% 


100.0% 






District 28 




















Buncombe 


1,334 


98 


173 


209 


21 


1 


1,836 


69.4 


35.0 


% of Total 


72.7% 


5.3% 


9.4% 


11.4% 


1.1% 


0.1% 


100.0% 






District 29 




















Henderson 


489 


bl 


55 


90 


32 


11 


738 


108.2 


49.0 


McDowell 


243 


19 


13 


4 


17 


2 


298 


74.6 


28.0 


Polk 


67 


2 


17 


11 


2 





99 


83.6 


45.0 


Rutherford 


435 


41 


73 


100 


157 


111 


9b7 


268.0 


87.0 


Transylvania 


185 


L7 


15 


26 


73 


1 


313 


163.5 


65.0 


District Totals 


1,469 


140 


174 


231 


281 


125 


2,420 


174.2 


62.0 


% of Total 


60.7% 


5.3% 


7.2% 


9.5% 


11.6% 


5.2% 


100.0% 






District 30 




















Cherokee 


157 


10 


55 


32 


107 


170 


531 


475.4 


443.0 


Clay 


58 


3 


1 


4 


2 





b8 


54.7 


15.0 


Graham 


52 


9 


11 


16 


5 





93 


120.2 


72.0 


Haywood 


175 


14 


29 


14 


10 


3 


245 


85.1 


30.0 


Jackson 


115 


5 


7 


4 


1 


2 


134 


61.3 


28.0 


Macon 


80 


17 


5 


16 


13 


18 


149 


314.2 


79.0 


Swain 


49 


1 


2 


4 


4 





60 


80.7 


23.0 


District Totals 


686 


59 


no 


90 


142 


193 


1,280 


271.9 


72.0 


X of Total 


53.6% 


4.6% 


8.6% 


7.0% 


11.1% 


15.1% 


100.0% 






State Totals 


SO, 943 


7,264 


8,753 


11,875 


6,317 


2,714 


97,366 


134.5 


57.0 


% of Total 


62.3% 


7.4% 


8.9% 


12.1% 


6.5% 


2.8% 


100.0% 







206 



AGES OF DISPOSED CRIMINAL NON-MOTOR 
VEHICLE CASES IN THE DISTRICT COURTS 

Ages of Cases Disposed July 1, 1987 - June 30, 1988 

Ages or Disposed Cases (Days) 





0-90 


91-120 


121-180 


181-365 


366-730 


>730 


Total 
Disposed 


Mean 
Age 


Media 
Age 


District 1 




















Camden 


177 


5 


2 


3 








137 


35.3 


28.0 


Chowan 


659 


S 


1 





4 





678 


26.1 


18.0 


Currl tuck 


A71 


12 


4 


9 








496 


31.1 


22.0 


Dare 


2,605 


11 


70 


140 


4 


1 


2,392 


41.8 


22.0 


Gates 


340 


7 


3 


1 








351 


29.9 


25.0 


Pasquotank 


2,155 


19 


2 2 


28 


4 





2,228 


28.9 


20.0 


Perquimans 


428 


a 


7 


8 








451 


31.3 


22.0 


District Totals 


6,835 


131 


109 


195 


12 


1 


7,283 


34.3 


21.0 


% of Total 


93.8% 


1.8% 


1.5% 


2.7% 


0.2% 


0.0% 


100.0% 






District 2 




















Beaufort 


3,063 


59 


36 


32 


7 


10 


3,207 


26.1 


14.0 


Hyde 


513 


13 


.3 


3 


4 





541 


32.2 


21.0 


Martin 


1,202 


18 


17 


13 


3 


1 


1,254 


24.2 


13.0 


Tyrrell 


261 


8 


4 


2 








275 


30.4 


23.0 


Washington 


893 


8 


7 


2 








910 


21.9 


15.0 


District Totals 


5,932 


106 


72 


52 


14 


11 


6,187 


25.3 


14.0 


% of Total 


95.9% 


1.7% 


1.2% 


0.8% 


0.2% 


0.2% 


100.0% 






District 3 




















Carteret 


3,951 


374 


379 


299 


47 


24 


5,074 


64.5 


35.0 


Craven 


5,339 


418 


440 


300 


54 





6,551 


51.8 


26.0 


Pamlico 


543 


39 


52 


33 


2 





669 


53.7 


30.0 


Pitt 


10,618 


793 


609 


353 


15 


1 


12,394 


46.9 


30.0 


District Totals 


20,451 


1,624 


1,480 


990 


113 


25 


24,688 


52.0 


30.0 


% of Total 


82.8% 


6.6% 


6.0% 


4.0% 


0.5% 


0.1% 


100.0% 






District 4 




















Duplin 


2,594 


114 


91 


59 


2 


1 


2,861 


39.5 


23.0 


Jones 


472 


16 


19 


10 


3 





520 


36.5 


22.0 


Onslow 


10,888 


518 


619 


226 


30 





12,231 


36.9 


20.0 


Sampson 


3,202 


170 


129 


45 


7 





3,553 


43.4 


33.0 


District Totals 


17,156 


818 


858 


340 


42 


1 


19,215 


33.4 


23.0 


% of Total 


89.3% 


4.3% 


4.5% 


1.8% 


0.2% 


0.0% 


100.0% 






District 5 




















New Hanover 


13,384 


621 


499 


479 


305 


150 


15,438 


57.9 


26.0 


Pender 


1,503 


83 


bo 


69 


2b 


9 


1,761 


54.3 


22.0 


District Totals 


14,387 


709 


565 


548 


331 


159 


17,199 


57.5 


25.0 


% of Total 


86.6% 


4.1% 


3.3% 


3.2% 


1.9% 


0.9% 


100.0% 






District 6 




















Bertie 


1,253 


15 


13 


9 


2 





1,292 


23.6 


15.0 


Halifax 


3,937 


224 


17'4 


55 


54 





4,444 


42.8 


28.0 


Hertford 


1,713 


46 


22 


9 








1,790 


28.7 


20.0 


Northampton 


948 


26 


23 


1U 


9 





1,021 


31.1 


14.0 


District Totals 


7,851 


311 


237 


83 


65 





8,547 


35.5 


22.0 


% of Total 


91.9% 


3.6% 


2.8% 


1.0% 


0.8% 


0.0% 


100.0% 






District 7 




















Edgecombe 


4,420 


361 


357 


432 


65 


4 


5,639 


65.1 


36.0 


Nash 


6,070 


502 


531 


432 


60 


b 


7,601 


60.0 


34.0 


Wilson 


4,084 


475 


560 


505 


163 


21 


5,813 


84.6 


47.0 


District Totals 


14,574 


1,338 


1,448 


1,369 


293 


31 


19,053 


69.0 


38.0 


% of Total 


76.5% 


7.0% 


7.6% 


7.2% 


1.5% 


0.2% 


100.0% 







207 



0-90 



District 8 



Greene 




747 


Lenoir 




3,619 


Wayne 




5,347 


District Totals 


9,713 


% of Total 




77.92 


District 9 






Franklin 




2,294 


Granville 




2,249 


Person 




1,986 


Vance 




3,976 


Warren 




878 


District To 


tals 


11,383 


% of Total 




91.0% 


District 10 






Wake 




24,717 


% of Total 




75.4% 


District 11 







Harnett 

Johnston 

Lee 



3,824 
4,797 
3,949 



District Totals 12,570 
% of Total 87.9% 



District 12 

Cumberland 

Hoke 



14,992 
1,678 



District Totals 16,670 
% of Total 68.7% 



District 13 




Bladen 


2,217 


Brunswick 


2,446 


Columbus 


3,682 


District Totals 


8,345 


% of Total 


38.7% 


District 14 




Durham 


12,171 


% of Total 


73.3% 


District 15A 




Alamance 


6,401 


% of Total 


91.3% 


District 15B 




Chatham 


2,201 


Orange 


4,177 



District Totals 6,373 
% of Total 86.7% 



District 16 

Robeson 

Scotland 



AGES OF DISPOSED CRIMINAL NON-MOTOR 
VEHICLE CASES IN THE DISTRICT COURTS 

Ages of Cases Disposed July 1, 1987 - June 30, 1988 

Ages of Disposed Cases (Days) 



91-120 

bZ 
377 
497 

936 
7.5% 



102 
57 

31 

157 

35 

432 
3.5% 



2,366 
7.2% 



180 
276 
147 

603 

4.2% 



1,901 
180 

2,031 
8.6% 



109 
180 
191 

480 
5.1% 



1,525 
9.2% 



121-180 



181-365 



10,533 
4,363 



District Totals 14,896 
% of Total 92.4% 



223 
3.2% 



112 
216 

328 

4.5% 



350 

147 

497 
3.1% 



54 


37 


426 


276 


553 


Jo7 


1,033 


680 


3.3% 


5.5% 


98 


55 


55 


42 


43 


43 


100 


92 


37 


14 


333 


251 


2.7% 


2.0% 


2,125 


2,755 


6.5% 


3.4% 


135 


138 


271 


210 


149 


62 


605 


450 


4.2% 


3.2% 


2,512 


2,439 


164 


75 


2,676 


2,514 


11.0% 


10.4% 


71 


41 


138 


97 


114 


57 


323 


195 


3.4% 


2.1% 


1,609 


1,103 


9.7% 


6.6% 


133 


155 


2.0% 


2.2% 


71 


70 


239 


181 


360 


251 


4.9% 


3.4% 


3b4 


212 


70 


49 


434 


261 


2.7% 


i.6% 



366-730 

22 
41 
J3 

101 

0.8% 



10 
V, 
30 

lb 
'•. 

102 
0.3% 



752 

2.3% 



36 
18 

5 

59 

0.4% 



249 

39 

288 
1.2% 



14 
25 
15 

54 
0.6% 



162 

1.0% 



91 

1.3% 



15 
21 

36 
0.5% 



13 
6 

24 
0.1% 



>730 

2 


u 

2 

0.0£ 



1 


o 
o 

5 

0.0% 



56 

0.2% 



3 



3 

0.0% 



39 

5 

44 
0.2% 



3 
3 
2 

13 
0.1% 



26 

0.2% 



2 
0.0% 





2 

2 
0.0% 



1 
1 

2 
0.0% 



Total 


Mean 


Median 


Disposed 


Age 


Age 


924 


61.2 


29.0 


4,739 


63.8 


37.0 


6,802 


60.7 


39.0 


12,465 


61.9 


37.0 


100.0% 






2,563 


38.3 


19.0 


2,440 


37.2 


19.0 


2,194 


48.9 


31.0 


4,341 


28.4 


7.0 


968 


32.7 


15.0 


12,506 


36.1 


17.0 


100.0% 






32,771 


74.9 


43.0 


100.0% 






4,416 


47.0 


23.0 


5,572 


47.0 


27.0 


4,312 


33.9 


20.0 


14,300 


43.0 


.23.0 


100.0% 






22,132 


79.5 


45.0 


2,141 


63.2 


37.0 


24,273 


78.1 


44.0 


100.0% 






2,455 


43.2 


27.0 


2,894 


50.4 


27.0 


4,061 


39.3 


24.0 


9,410 


43.7 


26.0 


100.0% 






16,596 


69.0 


42.0 


100.0% 






7,010 


42.7 


25.0 


100.0% 






2,469 


41.7 


22.0 


4,886 


48.5 


28.0 


7,355 


46.2 


26.0 


100.0% 






11,478 


29.9 


14.0 


4,636 


29.0 


16.0 


16,114 


29.6 


15.0 


100.0% 







208 



AGES OF DISPOSED CRIMINAL NON-MOTOR 
VEHICLE CASES IN THE DISTRICT COURTS 

Ages of Cases Disposed July 1, 1987 - June 30, 1988 

Ages of Disposed Cases (Days) 





0-90 


91-120 


121-180 


181-365 


366-730 


>730 


Total 
Disposed 


Mean 
Age 


Median 
Age 


District 17A 

Caswell 

Rockingham 


979 
5,439 


32 

1/4 


11 

92 


14 
S4 


6 
19 







1,042 
5,308 


31.3 
35.0 


21.0 
22.0 


District Totals 
% of Total 


6,418 
93.7? 


206 
3.0% 


103 
1.5% 


98 
1.4% 


25 

0.4% 



0.0% 


6,850 
100.0% 


34.4 


22.0 


District 17B 

Stokes 

Surry 


1,256 
2,951 


123 

207 


135 
209 


33 
66 


4 

1 






1,603 
3,434 


56.2 

43.9 


37.0 
36.0 


District Totals 
% of Total 


4,207 
83.52 


330 
6.6% 


394 

7.3% 


101 
2.0% 


3 
0.1% 



0.0% 


5,037 
100.0% 


51.2 


36.0 


District 13 
Guilford 
% of Total 


13,508 
60.5% 


2,737 

9.1% 


3,609 
11.3% 


3,737 
12.2% 


1,715 
5.6% 


214 
0.7% 


30,570 

100.0% 


113.6 


64.0 


District 19A 

Cabarrus 

Rowan 


5,069 
4,836 


177 
191 


33 
157 


111 
130 


4d 
20 






5,493 
5,334 


42.9 
41.5 


29.0 
27.0 


District Totals 
% of Total 


9,905 
91.5% 


368 
3.4% 


245 
2.3% 


241 
2.2% 


68 
0.6% 



0.0% 


10,827 
100.0% 


42.3 


28.0 


District 198 

Montgomery 

Randolph 


2,103 
4,680 


109 
480 


67 
352 


60 
177 


40 
126 


1 
I 


2,330 
5,816 


46.7 
63.7 


26.0 
4-2.0 


District Totals 
% of Total 


6,783 
82.8% 


589 
7.2% 


419 
5.1% 


237 
2.9% 


166 
2.0% 


2 
0.0% 


8,196 

100.0% 


58.7 


37.0 


District 20 

Anson 

Moore 

Richmond 

Stanly 

Union 


1,957 
3,943 
3,735 
2,449 
4,358 


52 

152 

67 

70 

140 


J3 
123 

72 
48 
98 


13 
56 
45 
34 
79 


1 

19 

2 

1 
7 



2 


1 
1 


2,056 
4,295 
3,921 
2,603 
4,683 


31.1 
34.9 
26.3 
34.8 
35.0 


22.0 
20.0 
14.0 
25.0 
21.0 


District Totals 
X of Total 


16,442 
93.6% 


481 
2.7% 


374 
2.1% 


227 
1.3% 


30 
0.2% 


4 
0.0% 


17,558 

100.0% 


32.6 


20.0 


District 21 
Forsyth 
% of Total 


19,277 

90.2% 


344 
1.6% 


295 
1.4% 


327 
1.5% 


547 
2.6% 


575 
2.7% 


21,365 

100.0% 


69.2 


22.0 


District 22 

Alexander 

Davidson 

Davie 

Iredell 


1,580 
7,376 
1,023 
6,943 


83 
504 

74 
524 


77 
326 

4b 
326 


4b 
219 

41 
233 


10 

53 



48 



3 


8 


1,796 
8,431 
1,184 
8,082 


45.5 
49.5 
47.7 
53.5 


27.0 
30.0 
34.0 
36.0 


District Totals 
% of Total 


16,922 
86.6% 


1,185 

6.1% 


775 
4.0% 


539 

2.8% 


111 
0.6% 


11 
0.1% 


19,543 
100.0% 


50.7 


33.0 


District 23 

Alleghany 

Ashe 

Wilkes 

Yadkin 


337 

629 

3,374 

948 


5 

8 

119 

35 


6 

4 

137 

23 


13 

5 
50 
13 




1 
60 

1 






59 




361 

647 

3,799 

1,025 


35.3 
22.5 
58.0 
35.0 


21.0 
16.0 
22.0 
23.0 


District Totals 
% of Total 


5,288 
90.73! 


167 

2.9% 


175 

3.0% 


81 
1.4% 


62 
1.1% 


59 

1.0% 


5,832 
100.0% 


48.6 


21.0 



209 



AGES OF DISPOSED CRIMINAL NON-MOTOR 
VEHICLE CASES IN THE DISTRICT COURTS 

Ages of Cases Disposed July 1, 1987 - June 30, 1988 

Ages of Disposed Cases (Days) 





0-90 


91-120 


121-180 


181-365 


366-730 


>730 


Total 
Disposed 


Mean 
Age 


Median 
Age 


District 24 




















Avery 


437 


23 


37 


43 


26 





616 


74.7 


37.0 


Madison 


543 


44 


30 


k) 


13 


4 


683 


73.3 


45.0 


Mitchell 


513 


77 


25 


21 


3 





644 


57.9 


41.0 


Watauga 


1,177 


103 


lUO 


111 


i5 


1 


1,543 


72.5 


36.0 


Yancey 


346 


2b 


16 


14 


2 





404 


48.9 


31.0 


District Totals 


3,066 


273 


214 


238 


94 


5 


3,890 


68.1 


38.0 


X of Total 


78.8% 


7.0% 


5.5% 


6.1% 


2.4% 


0.1% 


100.0% 






District 25 




















Burke 


3,913 


175 


160 


152 


14 





4,419 


41.2 


22.0 


Caldwell 


3,732 


261 


216 


162 


2 2 





4,393 


48.7 


28.0 


Catawba 


6,293 


434 


416 


367 


17 


J 


7,527 


50.7 


29.0 


District Totals 


13,943 


870 


792 


681 


53 





16,339 


47.6 


27.0 


% of Total 


85.3% 


5.3% 


4.8% 


4.2% 


0.3% 


0.0% 


100.0% 






District 26 










'■ 










Mecklenburg 


33,658 


2,761 


2,434 


3,212 


1,075 


256 


43,396 


72.3 


36.0 


% of Total 


77.6% 


6.4% 


5.6% 


7.4% 


2.5% 


0.6% 


100.0% 






District 27A 




















Gaston 


10,421 


1,316 


1,058 


1,067 


316 


43 


14,221 


81.5 


52.0 


X of Total 


73.3% 


9.3% 


7.4% 


7.5% 


2.2% 


0.3% 


100.0% 






District 276 




















Cleveland 


4,273 


240 


112 


105 


13 


1 


4,749 


40.0 


.24.0 


Lincoln 


2,972 


117 


101 


45 


9 





3,244 


37.1 


25.0 


District Totals 


7,245 


357 


213 


150 


27 


1 


7,993 


38.8 


24.0 


X of Total 


90. ex 


4.5% 


2.7% 


1.9% 


0.3% 


0.0% 


100.0% 






District 28 




















Buncombe 


13,352 


495 


509 


772 


121 


2 


15,251 


47.9 


25.0 


% of Total 


87.5% 


3.2% 


3.3% 


5.1% 


0.8% 


0.0% 


100.0% 






District 29 








-• 












Henderson 


3,145 


223 


lb4 


133 


65 


19 


3,749 


61.5 


33.0 


McDowell 


1,812 


95 


72 


55 


20 


1 


2,055 


49.9 


30.0 


Polk 


518 


30 


31 


13 


7 


U 


604 


49.6 


28.0 


Rutherford 


3,089 


218 


205 


177 


23 





3,712 


56.3 


37.0 


Transylvania 


1,261 


106 


50 


55 


14 





1,492 


52.8 


24.0 


District Totals 


9,825 


672 


522 


438 


129 


26 


11,612 


56.1 


32.0 


% of Total 


84.6% 


5.8% 


4.5% 


3.8% 


1.1% 


0.2% 


100.0% 






District 30 




















Cherokee 


934 


171 


139 


109 


111 


18 


1,482 


111.4 


60.0 


Clay 


310 


17 


8 


9 


4 





343 


44.3 


32.0 


Graham 


289 


17 


14 


7 








327 


47.8 


34.0 


Haywood 


2,422 


75 


36 


77 


17 





2,677 


40.5 


23.0 


Jackson 


852 


39 


31 


17 


7 





946 


39.9 


21.0 


Macon 


556 


36 


22 


17 


20 


9 


660 


73.9 


28.0 


Swain 


570 


32 


24 


9 


2 





637 


43.4 


30.0 


District Totals 


5,933 


387 


324 


245 


161 


27 


7,077 


59.2 


30.0 


% of Total 


83.8% 


5.5% 


4.6% 


3.5% 


2.3% 


0.4% 


100.0% 






State Totals 


412,123 


28,096 


26,860 


24,593 


7,249 


1,608 


500,529 


59.1 


30.0 


% of Total 


82.3% 


5.6% 


5.4% 


4.9% 


1.4% 


0.3% 


100.0% 







210 



INFRACTION CASE FILINGS 
DISPOSITIONS IN THE DISTRICT 

July 1, 1987 - June 30, 1988 



AND 
COURTS 



District 1 



Total 
Filed 



Dispositions 



Camden 




685 


Chowan 




1,406 


Currituck 




2,077 


Dare 




7,253 


Gates 




1,100 


Pasquotank 




1,791 


Perquimans 




1,400 


District 


Totals 


15,712 


District 2 






Beaufort 




6,045 


Hyde 




1,031 


Martin 




4,130 


Tyrrell 




2,377 


Washington 




1,235 


District 


Totals 


14,813 


District 3 






Carteret 




7,290 


Craven 




7,994 


Pamlico 




869 


Pitt 




11,270 


District 


Totals 


27,423 


District 4 







Duplin 3,152 

Jones 1,362 

Onslow 8,836 

Sampson 5,612 

District Totals 18,962 



District 5 




New Hanover 


12,901 


Pender 


2,759 


District Totals 


15,660 


District 6 




Bertie 


2,297 


Halifax 


8,881 


Hertford 


2,561 


Northampton 


4,917 


District Totals 


18,656 


District 7 




Edgecombe 


5,696 


Nash 


6,441 


Wilson 


5,954 


District Totals 


18,091 


District 8 




Greene 


1,503 


Lenoir 


6,147 


Wayne 


6,447 



District Totals 



14,097 



Waiver 

5 54 
1,181 

1,746 
6,055 
842 
1,447 
1,151 

12,976 



4,234 

642 

2,743 

1,314 

941 

10,424 



5,405 

5,590 

536 

6,575 

18,106 



2,262 

747 

5,862 

3,936 

12,807 



7,261 
1,644 

8,905 



1,712 
6,383 
1,970 
3,732 

13,797 



4,264 
5,095 
4,445 

13,304 



904 
3,673 
3,831 

8,408 



Other 

99 
115 

61 

1,029 

214 

284 

188 

1,990 



1,460 
333 
992 

i 29 
302 

3,416 



1,789 

2,376 

323 

4,640 

9,128 



490 

407 

2,957 

1,851 

5,705 



5,165 
908 

6,073 



621 
2,439 

591 
1,430 

5,081 



1,340 
1,404 
1,212 

3,956 



554 
2,285 
2,455 

5,294 



Total Dispositions 

653 
1,296 
1,807 
7,084 
1,056 
1,731 
1,339 

14,966 



5,744 
975 
3,735 
2,143 
1,243 



13,840 



7,194 

7,966 

859 

11,215 

27,234 



2,752 
1,154 
8,819 
5,787 

18,512 



12,426 
2,552 

14,978 



2,333 
3,822 
2,561 
5,162 

13,878 



5,604 
6,499 
5,657 

17,760 



1,458 
5,958 
6,286 

13,702 



211 





Total 




Filed 


District 9 




Franklin 


2,249 


Granville 


3,161 


Person 


2,397 


Vance 


3,377 


Warren 


1,937 


District Totals 


13,171 


District 10 




Wake 


42,173 


District 11 




Harnett 


4,988 


Johnston 


7,133 


Lee 


3,336 



INFRACTION CASE FILINGS AND 
DISPOSITIONS IN THE DISTRICT COURTS 

July 1, 1987 - June 30, 1988 

Dispositions 



District Totals 

District 12 

Cumberland 

Hoke 

District Totals 

District 13 
Bladen 
Brunswick 
Columbus 

District Totals 

District 14 



Durham 




District 


15A 


Alamance 




District 


15B 



Chatham 
Orange 

District Totals 

District 16 



15,457 



25,516 
2,880 

28,396 



3,346 
4,475 
4,177 

11,998 
18,339 

10,340 



5,306 
8,046 

13,352 



Robeson 


8 


423 


Scotland 


2 


599 


District Totals 


11 


022 


District 17A 






Caswell 


2 


305 


Rockingham 


7 


,742 


District Totals 


10 


,047 


District 17B 







Stokes 
Surry 

District Totals 



2,170 
4,669 

6,839 



Waiver 

1,325 
2,223 
1,571 
2,081 
1,298 

3,503 
22,944 



3,272 
4,301 
2,227 

9,800 



16,835 
2,172 

19,007 



2,213 
3,386 
2,547 

3,651 



11,628 



6,216 



3,334 
4,834 

8,163 



6,358 
2,159 

8,517 



1,640 
5,579 

7,219 



1,602 
3,283 

4,885 



Other 

798 
854 
775 
1,114 
562 

4,103 

19,804 



1,464 

2,951 

394 

5 , 309 



8,492 
625 

9,117 



1,073 
2,003 
1,557 

4,633 



5,875 



3,669 



1,775 
2,709 

4,484 



1,654 
706 

2,360 



638 
1,917 

2,555 



622 
1,240 

1,362 



Total Dispositions 

2,123 

3,032 
2,346 
3,195 
1,360 

12,606 
42,748 



4,736 
7,252 
3,121 

15,109 



25,327 
2,797 

28,124 



3,291 
5,889 
4,104 

13,284 
17,503 

9,885 



5,109 
7,543 

12,652 



8,012 
2,865 

10,377 



2,278 
7,496 

9,774 



2,224 
4,523 

6,747 



212 



District 18 
Guilford 



INFRACTION CASE FILINGS AND 
DISPOSITIONS IN THE DISTRICT COURTS 
July 1, 1987 - June 30, 1988 



Total 
Filed 



45,680 



Waiver 

24,297 



Dispositions 



Other 

17,926 



Total Dispositions 
42,223 



District 19A 



Cabarrus 


7,893 


Rowan 


6,715 


District Totals 


14,608 


District 19B 




Montgomery 


1,920 


Randolph 


9,723 


District Totals 


11,643 


District 20 




Anson 


3,510 


Moore 


5,314 


Richmond 


4,127 


Stanly 


3,216 


Union 


6,523 



District Totals 



22,690 



0,614 
4,589 

10,203 



1,333 
6,206 

7,594 



2,145 
3,167 
2,863 
2,274 
4,529 

14,973 



2,281 
1,898 

4,179 



6 38 
2,756 

3,394 



1,016 

1,7 58 

910 

838 

1,502 

6,024 



7,395 
6,487 

14,382 



2,026 
3,962 

10,988 



3,161 
4,925 
3,773 
3,112 
6,031 

21,002 



District 


21 


Forsyth 




District 


22 



Alexander 
Davidson 
Davie 
Iredell 

District Totals 

District 23 

Alleghany 

Ashe 

Wilkes 

Yadkin 

District Totals 

District 24 

Avery 

Madison 

Mitchell 

Watauga 

Yancey 

District Totals 

District 25 
Burke 
Caldwell 
Catawba 

District Totals 

District 26 
Mecklenburg 



23,967 



1,621 
6,972 
2,479 
9,480 

20,552 



1,092 
1,731 
3,620 
2,530 

8,973 



1,915 
1,4*1 
669 
2,840 
1,091 

8,006 



6,530 

4,245 

10,960 

21,735 



42,825 



13,472 



1,022 
4,435 
1,569 
6,056 

13,082 



743 
1,266 
2,617 
1,727 

6,353 



1,431 
1,229 

444 
2,208 

328 

6,140 



4,388 
2,575 
7,474 

14,437 
31,868 



10,114 



611 
2,265 

508 
3,043 

6,427 



261 
389 
943 
717 

2,310 



236 
234 

192 
613 

94 

1,369 



2,121 
1,413 
3,469 

7,003 



10,482 



23,586 



1,633 
6,700 
2,077 
9,099 

19,509 



1,004 
1,655 
3,560 
2,444 

8,663 



1,667 
1,463 

636 
2,821 

922 

7,509 



6,509 

3,988 

10,943 

21,440 
42,350 



213 



District 27A 
Gas ton 



District 278 



INFRACTION CASE FILINGS AND 
DISPOSITIONS IN THE DISTRICT COURTS 

July 1, 1987 - June 30, 1988 



Total 
Filed 

12,536 



Cleveland 


7,393 


Lincoln 


3,243 


District Totals 


10,636 


District 28 




Buncombe 


11,743 


District 29 




Henderson 


5,101 


McDowell 


3,476 


Polk 


1,622 


Rutherford 


3,746 


Transylvania 


1,229 


District Totals 


15,174 


District 30 




Cherokee 


2,395 


Clay 


577 


Graham 


419 


Haywood 


4,194 


Jackson 


2,146 


Macon 


1,634 


Swain 


2,159 


District Totals 


13,524 


State Totals 


608,845 



Waiver 
8,211 

5,608 
2,181 

7,739 
9,779 



4,290 
2,818 
1,343 
2,340 
941 

12,232 



1,957 
450 
309 
3,399 
1,755 
1,362 
1,544 

11,276 

406,476 



Dispositions 




Other 


Total Dispositions 


3,909 


12,120 


1,492 


7,100 


997 


3,178 


2,489 


10,278 


1,540 


11,319 


626 


4,916 


47/ 


3,295 


212 


1,555 


939 


3,779 


191 


1,132 



2,445 

500 
95 
43 
551 
33'3 
226 
281 

2,031 

186,056 



14,677 

2,457 
545 
352 
3,950 
2,090 
2,088 
1,825 

13,307 

592,532 



214 



STATE LIBRARY OF NORTH CAROLINA 



3 3091 00748 3191